Interesting read by Thom Hogan

Started 7 months ago | Discussions
DFPanno
Senior MemberPosts: 2,679Gear list
Like?
We have different standards…..
In reply to rrccad, 7 months ago

rrccad wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

Just an aside:

It is important to note that while Canikon has a wide array of lenses, many of them are outdated and cannot keep up with currents sensors let alone the sensor tech that may be coming down the pike.

In truth both companies may have have 5-10 lenses each that are ready for the future.

without even trying i'm up to 18 FF canon lenses. I doubt nikon is much different.

For you it is 18; someone else 32.

For me 5-10.

It's all good.

 DFPanno's gear list:DFPanno's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
aerorail
Contributing MemberPosts: 663Gear list
Like?
funny he...
In reply to Geedorama, 7 months ago

has an article where he carries the SONY RX100 around wherever he goes instead of the dslr's

 aerorail's gear list:aerorail's gear list
RX100 III
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
wb2trf
Senior MemberPosts: 1,402
Like?
The guy is an irrelevant dinosaur
In reply to Geedorama, 7 months ago

What happens to people who believe stuff like this is that when finally their old ship sinks they don't understand what hit it.  He's living in the past.  In a cocktail of old blather he may mix a few truths, by accident, but basically his day is done. He's just wandering blind over the field, wrapped in his antique self-importance.  Someone should get him a rocker.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
RonFrank
Senior MemberPosts: 1,606Gear list
Like?
Re: Interesting read by Thom Hogan
In reply to Geedorama, 7 months ago

Thom has a great grasp on the past and certainly understands the DSLR market.  But I am not clear if he is too much a photo pro to put his shoes into those of the iphone loving masses or even the D800 shooting amateurs.

So what do consumers want?  Do they want high end chunky glass?  Do they want light weight glass?  Do they want FF cameras? Do they prefer smaller iphone cameras (many do)?  How much are they willing to spend on a camera?

I think the writing is on the wall.  Everyman has a phone that can be used as a computer, a phone, a browser, a camera, basically a multi-media do all tool.  Where does that leave camera manufactures?

There will always be those that enjoy making images, but I am thinking photography will never grow much beyond what it is now. 10 years ago one needed a dedicated camera to capture images. Now everyone I know has a camera built in a phone. So will they invest in dedicated cameras like the A6000, or D610, or d4s? I think many have become quite satisfied with the camera in their phone, and they continue to get more feature rich.  I go to events and see a ton of camera phones and a few higher end models. The camera phones are growing while dedicated cameras are shrinking.

Where does that leave the dedicated camera market?  What is the overall market, and where will that be tomorrow?  That is the question that manufactures are attempting to predict, and have been for decades!

OTOH I see security cameras everywhere, at intersections, in stores, everywhere! ...  disturbing!

If I had these answers, (or if Thom did) we would be sitting around lighting our cigars with hundred dollar bills! 

 RonFrank's gear list:RonFrank's gear list
Nikon D1X Nikon D200 Nikon D300S Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Robert Morris
Contributing MemberPosts: 697Gear list
Like?
Re: The guy is an irrelevant dinosaur
In reply to wb2trf, 7 months ago

wb2trf wrote:

What happens to people who believe stuff like this is that when finally their old ship sinks they don't understand what hit it. He's living in the past. In a cocktail of old blather he may mix a few truths, by accident, but basically his day is done. He's just wandering blind over the field, wrapped in his antique self-importance. Someone should get him a rocker.

So exactly what are you adding to this conversation by attacking someone who probability knows more about the camera, electronic, computer and software industry than anyone. So what are you credentials, T.W.I.T., or are you just an internet wannabe!

-- hide signature --

RM

 Robert Morris's gear list:Robert Morris's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000 Nikon D90 Nikon D700 Nikon 1 V1 +30 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
DFPanno
Senior MemberPosts: 2,679Gear list
Like?
Exactly….
In reply to Robert Morris, 7 months ago

Robert Morris wrote:

wb2trf wrote:

What happens to people who believe stuff like this is that when finally their old ship sinks they don't understand what hit it. He's living in the past. In a cocktail of old blather he may mix a few truths, by accident, but basically his day is done. He's just wandering blind over the field, wrapped in his antique self-importance. Someone should get him a rocker.

So exactly what are you adding to this conversation by attacking someone who probability knows more about the camera, electronic, computer and software industry than anyone. So what are you credentials, T.W.I.T., or are you just an internet wannabe!

-- hide signature --

RM

An anonymous non-entity in the world of photography calls out of of the most recognized names in the field.

LMAO.

 DFPanno's gear list:DFPanno's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R Canon EF 50mm f/1.2L USM +13 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
walnorth
Regular MemberPosts: 106
Like?
Re: Interesting read by Thom Hogan
In reply to Geedorama, 7 months ago

Geedorama wrote:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/can-you-trust-the-camera.html

-- hide signature --

http://www.flickr.com/photos/guido_2007/
Ideally, the lens captures what the eye had in mind...but the damn thing won't listen.

Respectfully, this just makes me feel old. How many lenses do you need? My first pro job was in 1965 for Ford Motor. I've used view cameras. How many lenses did I need to do everything I needed to do? I've used Hasselblads? How many lenses were there in their lineup? I've used Leica. How many lenses make up a nice and useable kit? (hint, viewfinder) I liked Leica CL as a small carry camera with just a 40 and a 90. I moved to a Contax G as a small carry camera (carrying a view camera 24/7 is a bit tiring). How many lenses there? Fortunately, I kept the 28, 45, and 90 and use them on my NEX7.

Sometimes there is a need for exotic lenses. I have gear lust as much as anyone, but a limited list of lenses from a camera company is not a barrier to your taking great photos.

I've taught photography part time, for the pleasure, including at a school of architecture. One lesson was to use one lens and one camera until it feels like a part of you. Until you can operate the camera without any thought. Know what the scene will look like through your lens before you raise the camera to your eye. When done, you can move on to a second lens. The photographer's attention needs to be on the relationship between the photographer and the subject. If the photographer's attention is on the camera, good photos will appear on the contact sheet only by chance.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mike Fewster
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,713
Like?
Re: Thom makes a basic error.
In reply to Geedorama, 7 months ago

His logic  is good, but is built on sand. He is still thinking of cameras the way we thought of them in the 60's. He wants a "system", just like we used to have when the technology advanced slowly nd most changes were happening in the film processing.

The technology is just changing too fast today. Two years ago, if I had wanted a full system, small format camera, mft would have been my format of choice. If I had done that, arrival of ff small bodied cameras would have me looking for a new system today. And so on.  I simply cannot see a system any longer that meets my needs and I can only see the choices getting more complex. The answer now appears to be not to worry about a system, but to get different cameras for specific needs and just pick up the one that suits my needs for a particular shoot.

-- hide signature --

Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
liquid stereo
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,968Gear list
Like?
my suggestion of your basic error
In reply to Mike Fewster, 7 months ago

Mike Fewster wrote:

His logic is good, but is built on sand. He is still thinking of cameras the way we thought of them in the 60's. He wants a "system", just like we used to have when the technology advanced slowly nd most changes were happening in the film processing.

The technology is just changing too fast today. Two years ago, if I had wanted a full system, small format camera, mft would have been my format of choice. If I had done that, arrival of ff small bodied cameras would have me looking for a new system today. And so on. I simply cannot see a system any longer that meets my needs and I can only see the choices getting more complex. The answer now appears to be not to worry about a system, but to get different cameras for specific needs and just pick up the one that suits my needs for a particular shoot.

-- hide signature --

Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

Lens technology does not change. It hasn't. This is why Sony has been able to come up with a new camera every 3 to 5 months and not nearly enough lenses for all the cameras. 7+ years after taking over the A-mount, they've finally come out with a 70-200/4. Finally.

A for your potential/hypothetical switch from M43 to a ff small bodied camera, here's a suggestion: Buy the camera/product that meets your needs. If/when it stops, then buy something else. You need not subscribe to the camera subscription model. And, I'll also say that as someone who has switched systems, the money spent on lenses – especially quality lenses – is seldom/never lost, while the money spent on cameras – again, Sony has a new one every 3 to 5 months – is seldom returned/recovered.

Lesson: Digital cameras are disposable as the technology evolves quickly. Lenses, flashes, teleconverters, etc. are not.

 liquid stereo's gear list:liquid stereo's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Canon EOS 7D Fujifilm X-Pro1 Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Canon EF 300mm f/4.0L IS USM +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hip2
Regular MemberPosts: 449Gear list
Like?
Re: Exactly….
In reply to DFPanno, 7 months ago

DFPanno wrote:

Robert Morris wrote:

wb2trf wrote:

What happens to people who believe stuff like this is that when finally their old ship sinks they don't understand what hit it. He's living in the past. In a cocktail of old blather he may mix a few truths, by accident, but basically his day is done. He's just wandering blind over the field, wrapped in his antique self-importance. Someone should get him a rocker.

So exactly what are you adding to this conversation by attacking someone who probability knows more about the camera, electronic, computer and software industry than anyone. So what are you credentials, T.W.I.T., or are you just an internet wannabe!

-- hide signature --

RM

An anonymous non-entity in the world of photography calls out of of the most recognized names in the field.

LMAO.

maybe he is no one, but he is not wrong because of that.

he actually has a point in saying that the article was written with the assumption that the camera world and photographers need and thinking has not changed in the last 50 years. while lots of things changed just the last 5 years...

many here will say the same thing about this now : you don't look to buy a system now (it was not even about loyalty, it was more about being taken prisoner of a brand because of the lens prices).
canon and nikon have a hard time hopping on the mirrorless train because they cannot let go of their precious legacy lens line up. if they do that they will lose all their advantage. you can see Nikon answer when they released the Df.
People now have to look at bodies as seriously, if not more, as they look at lenses.
you no longer buy a set of lenses with a compatible body, with good rolls of films. you buy a into a body technology and feature set, with some lenses that fit your photography. if one is not enough to cover all your photography needs, you buy another different body technology with different lenses.
it's now very close to consumer electronics market recycling times.
the used market is even getting a huge boost because of that. someone's old camera is someone else's new toy in a matter of months only, and very old, rare, quirky lenses constantly resurfaces.
Thom Hogan want to be able to trust one camera maker because he wants the old ways back. buy something that will last 20-40 years. while this is great for the environment, the planet and all that, it is not the world we live in anymore.
he knows he cannot trust canon nor nikon because they won't be able to give us innovation, and he wants to trust sony but cannot because of his old habits.
Trying to push that on us only means he cannot handle his fears and inability to adapt to the current times ?

-- hide signature --

- The French HiP -

 hip2's gear list:hip2's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +44 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hip2
Regular MemberPosts: 449Gear list
Like?
Re: my suggestion of your basic error
In reply to liquid stereo, 7 months ago

liquid stereo wrote:

Mike Fewster wrote:

His logic is good, but is built on sand. He is still thinking of cameras the way we thought of them in the 60's. He wants a "system", just like we used to have when the technology advanced slowly nd most changes were happening in the film processing.

The technology is just changing too fast today. Two years ago, if I had wanted a full system, small format camera, mft would have been my format of choice. If I had done that, arrival of ff small bodied cameras would have me looking for a new system today. And so on. I simply cannot see a system any longer that meets my needs and I can only see the choices getting more complex. The answer now appears to be not to worry about a system, but to get different cameras for specific needs and just pick up the one that suits my needs for a particular shoot.

-- hide signature --

Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

Lens technology does not change. It hasn't. This is why Sony has been able to come up with a new camera every 3 to 5 months and not nearly enough lenses for all the cameras. 7+ years after taking over the A-mount, they've finally come out with a 70-200/4. Finally.

A for your potential/hypothetical switch from M43 to a ff small bodied camera, here's a suggestion: Buy the camera/product that meets your needs. If/when it stops, then buy something else. You need not subscribe to the camera subscription model. And, I'll also say that as someone who has switched systems, the money spent on lenses – especially quality lenses – is seldom/never lost, while the money spent on cameras – again, Sony has a new one every 3 to 5 months – is seldom returned/recovered.

Lesson: Digital cameras are disposable as the technology evolves quickly. Lenses, flashes, teleconverters, etc. are not.

Everybody wants to get value back from what they bought, especially expensive cameras.
but they cant anymore.

try to think about it another way : you already got value out of them, just look at the pictures you took while using them. which should be the point in buying them in the first place.

-- hide signature --

- The French HiP -

 hip2's gear list:hip2's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +44 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mike Fewster
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,713
Like?
Re: my suggestion of your basic error
In reply to liquid stereo, 7 months ago

liquid stereo wrote:

Mike Fewster wrote:

His logic is good, but is built on sand. He is still thinking of cameras the way we thought of them in the 60's. He wants a "system", just like we used to have when the technology advanced slowly nd most changes were happening in the film processing.

The technology is just changing too fast today. Two years ago, if I had wanted a full system, small format camera, mft would have been my format of choice. If I had done that, arrival of ff small bodied cameras would have me looking for a new system today. And so on. I simply cannot see a system any longer that meets my needs and I can only see the choices getting more complex. The answer now appears to be not to worry about a system, but to get different cameras for specific needs and just pick up the one that suits my needs for a particular shoot.

-- hide signature --

Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

Lens technology does not change. It hasn't. This is why Sony has been able to come up with a new camera every 3 to 5 months and not nearly enough lenses for all the cameras. 7+ years after taking over the A-mount, they've finally come out with a 70-200/4. Finally.

A for your potential/hypothetical switch from M43 to a ff small bodied camera, here's a suggestion: Buy the camera/product that meets your needs. If/when it stops, then buy something else. You need not subscribe to the camera subscription model. And, I'll also say that as someone who has switched systems, the money spent on lenses – especially quality lenses – is seldom/never lost, while the money spent on cameras – again, Sony has a new one every 3 to 5 months – is seldom returned/recovered.

Lesson: Digital cameras are disposable as the technology evolves quickly. Lenses, flashes, teleconverters, etc. are not.

Of course I agree that cameras change faster than lens technology, although it is how I used to think a decade ago. Changing iso abilty of cameras has changed the need for very fast lenses. Changing systems of AF has changed lens compatibility. Changes in IQ and dynamic range has changed whether or not I need a ff or DX system and the matching lenses. Lens correction software is changing some of the choices I might make in buying a lens. The interaction of camera/lens/sensor/ program is now a much more fluid thing with many variables and a future that is difficult to predict. I regard my gear now as consumer items and do not want to feel locked in to a system (with the possible exception of my RX1 which is truly a thing of beauty in its own right).

-- hide signature --

Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
wb2trf
Senior MemberPosts: 1,402
Like?
Re: The guy is an irrelevant dinosaur
In reply to Robert Morris, 7 months ago

Robert Morris wrote:

wb2trf wrote:

What happens to people who believe stuff like this is that when finally their old ship sinks they don't understand what hit it. He's living in the past. In a cocktail of old blather he may mix a few truths, by accident, but basically his day is done. He's just wandering blind over the field, wrapped in his antique self-importance. Someone should get him a rocker.

So exactly what are you adding to this conversation by attacking someone who probability knows more about the camera, electronic, computer and software industry than anyone. So what are you credentials, T.W.I.T., or are you just an internet wannabe!

Credentials? Ha. I'm in kindergarten, and I can see better than he can.  He is not worth wasting substantive time on.  His blog is about dslr's, he writes books about Nikon dslrs.  He has a vested interest in those electromechanical dinoraurs.  How can anyone take someone seriously who can't see the writing on the wall: electromechanical is obsolete, and he goes out the window with it.  Get it:  It doesn't matter who says it or doesn't, or what their credentials are, it can't be avoided or stopped.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with trusting any camera company. They are powerless, as the technology and the market will put an end to mirrors in the light box, just as surely as it did to every other mechanical contrivance for which an electronic substitute was developed.  There will only be cell phones and mirrorless cameras.  And it doesn't matter a whit what any particular camera company does, or what anyone says, or what anyone's credentials are.  He will retire with dslrs probably.  Snore.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hip2
Regular MemberPosts: 449Gear list
Like?
Re: Basic Point: It is all about the lenses
In reply to rrccad, 7 months ago

rrccad wrote:

Russell Evans wrote:

I think I would rather buy new excellent lenses for a new mount for the first time, than be having to face rebuying all my lenses to get the better, much more expensive, version II or III models, like Canon and Nikon owners are having to think about in order to keep up with sensor resolution. I don't know who has the type of money to throw down a couple of grand on a lens, in a multitude of $2000 plus lenses needing to be acquired, and I also don't know who wants to carry around ten or twenty grand worth of gear, or lug around fifteen to twenty pounds on their backs?

and you think FE 70-200/2.8 or super tele's are going to be much different? the FE 24-70/4 and 70-200/4 aren't that much different than their larger registration distance cousins, and certainly not cheaper.

the resale value I'd argue is much higher with canon and nikon with their larger installed bases, making "lease cost" of lens / camera upgrades over time far cheaper.

These new lenses are expensive because it's a niche market.
Sony knows they wont sell many of those for now, so they try to recoup the cost of unsold lenses
if they knew they could sell truck loads these new lenses everyday, they would sell it at cost.

when a manufacturer starts a new mount they feel obligated to make some "standard" set of lenses, because there are still people, with archaic ways of thinking and ancient expectations of how it should be, buying gear.
so a quality standard zoom and a quality telephoto zoom is always on the priority list for higher end cameras/mounts, even if they won't sell to the real buyers of the new cameras

i would even venture and say that if they could, Sony would much prefer selling only bodies, and never touching the lens market (i know it's ridiculous, but it's to show you the extreme case of what i mean)

-- hide signature --

- The French HiP -

 hip2's gear list:hip2's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +44 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hip2
Regular MemberPosts: 449Gear list
Like?
Re: my suggestion of your basic error
In reply to Mike Fewster, 7 months ago

Mike Fewster wrote:

liquid stereo wrote:

Mike Fewster wrote:

His logic is good, but is built on sand. He is still thinking of cameras the way we thought of them in the 60's. He wants a "system", just like we used to have when the technology advanced slowly nd most changes were happening in the film processing.

The technology is just changing too fast today. Two years ago, if I had wanted a full system, small format camera, mft would have been my format of choice. If I had done that, arrival of ff small bodied cameras would have me looking for a new system today. And so on. I simply cannot see a system any longer that meets my needs and I can only see the choices getting more complex. The answer now appears to be not to worry about a system, but to get different cameras for specific needs and just pick up the one that suits my needs for a particular shoot.

-- hide signature --

Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

Lens technology does not change. It hasn't. This is why Sony has been able to come up with a new camera every 3 to 5 months and not nearly enough lenses for all the cameras. 7+ years after taking over the A-mount, they've finally come out with a 70-200/4. Finally.

A for your potential/hypothetical switch from M43 to a ff small bodied camera, here's a suggestion: Buy the camera/product that meets your needs. If/when it stops, then buy something else. You need not subscribe to the camera subscription model. And, I'll also say that as someone who has switched systems, the money spent on lenses – especially quality lenses – is seldom/never lost, while the money spent on cameras – again, Sony has a new one every 3 to 5 months – is seldom returned/recovered.

Lesson: Digital cameras are disposable as the technology evolves quickly. Lenses, flashes, teleconverters, etc. are not.

Of course I agree that cameras change faster than lens technology, although it is how I used to think a decade ago. Changing iso abilty of cameras has changed the need for very fast lenses. Changing systems of AF has changed lens compatibility. Changes in IQ and dynamic range has changed whether or not I need a ff or DX system and the matching lenses. Lens correction software is changing some of the choices I might make in buying a lens. The interaction of camera/lens/sensor/ program is now a much more fluid thing with many variables and a future that is difficult to predict. I regard my gear now as consumer items and do not want to feel locked in to a system (with the possible exception of my RX1 which is truly a thing of beauty in its own right).

-- hide signature --

Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

the RX1 is a perfect example of a valid alternative niche "system" that would fit the new consumerist trend. buying just a body and one or two lenses specifically optimized for the body, and switch to the next when you have other needs, outgrow the camera, or new fancy technology lure your wallet back in.

-- hide signature --

- The French HiP -

 hip2's gear list:hip2's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +44 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hip2
Regular MemberPosts: 449Gear list
Like?
So what this article really is about...
In reply to Geedorama, 7 months ago

Geedorama wrote:

http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/can-you-trust-the-camera.html

-- hide signature --

http://www.flickr.com/photos/guido_2007/
Ideally, the lens captures what the eye had in mind...but the damn thing won't listen.

this article really make me think that Canon, Nikon and every manufacturer should just stop their stupid proprietary mount stupidity.

they should all get together and develop an international standard mount with an internation standard communication protocol between lens and body. like computer companies have done for the last few decades, so we can get compatible USB peripherals, or DVI/VGA screens, etc.

every camera we would get would be compatible with almost every lens, except for jump in versions of course, which could be worked around with manual controls.
then some manufacturers could focus exclusively on lenses, and others exclusively on bodies, others could optimize one specific lens for a specific body (RX1, my precious !)...

then we could all trust any manufacturer we want, we could even be fanboys, it would not matter at all.
we would all invest without fear of obsolete/incomplete systems or of companies failing to take the right turn at each technology gap

we could all focus on taking photos !

-- hide signature --

- The French HiP -

 hip2's gear list:hip2's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +44 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hip2
Regular MemberPosts: 449Gear list
Like?
Re: I thought Thom was dead on
In reply to jcharding, 7 months ago

jcharding wrote:

Having been a user of many of those systems over the last decade, yes even Pentax, I don't disagree with his major premise, which is that no current camera maker is currently trustworthy as we enter this next potential pivot - mirrorless and how that affects the primary lens mount of each camera maker.

I disagree, slightly, with Thom's final conclusion when he advises specific Canon and Nikon bodies because I think that Thom hasn't applied his major premise well in this instance - its unclear how the Canon and Nikon mounts will be able to move forward into and through this next pivot point. Sure Canon and Nikon could keep their current mounts and try to make them work in a mirrorless world, but IMHO there are a lot of challenges.

I agree with Thom about Pentax, even though I just helped my sister buy a K5 Mark II (or whatever its called), because it is really unclear where they can go.

I agree with Thom about Sony and m43, and also question Sony's ... stability... given the number of focus changes they have had since buying Minolta. Starting from their refusal to repair Minolta lenses to the focus shift to mirrorless full frame ... people may think and hope they know what Sony is doing but IMHO its hard to trust.

I don't think Thom paid enough attention to Fuji and Samsung. Two very different sets of camera DNA, but with their own respective strengths each has the ability to do something interesting - if not special.

-- hide signature --

to be fair to Sony, we all knew the mirrorless full frame was coming, at least ever since the first NEX was released. we just did not know if they would keep the E-mount for it, and which brand/name they would choose to push with it.

-- hide signature --

- The French HiP -

 hip2's gear list:hip2's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +44 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hip2
Regular MemberPosts: 449Gear list
Like?
Re: With regard to Canikon lenses…….
In reply to rrccad, 7 months ago

rrccad wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

Just an aside:

It is important to note that while Canikon has a wide array of lenses, many of them are outdated and cannot keep up with currents sensors let alone the sensor tech that may be coming down the pike.

In truth both companies may have have 5-10 lenses each that are ready for the future.

without even trying i'm up to 18 FF canon lenses. I doubt nikon is much different.

You must also be betting on that mirror is forever or that these lenses will seamlessly transition into mirrorless bodies?

canon / nikon could remove the mirror and leave the registration distance. they could even do hybrid systems where the mirror is only used in specific cases and not in others. going mirrorless doesn't necessarily mean adopting a different mount. while there is advantages - for a full frame sensor and professional grade lenses, the different in kit bulk is pretty trivial. you're not going to save any room with a 300/400/500 super telephoto setup between a registration distance of 44mm and 18mm.

Right now with over 80 million F mount lenses and 100 million EF mount lenses and nearly 15 million each and every year, the EF/F mount increase their installed base over any other mount. I suspect that the odds are pretty good on the survivability of the mounts.

I'd bet on that mass far more than for instance .. FE mount?

how many of your 18 lenses are ready for the 36Mpix of the A7R and the D800E ? how many are at the level of the Otus or the FE 55mm f/1.8 even though they can be much more expensive ?

and how many of your millions of F and EF mount lenses are just entry level kit lenses sold with the DSLRs ?

-- hide signature --

- The French HiP -

 hip2's gear list:hip2's gear list
Sony RX100 Sony RX1 Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony Alpha NEX-7 Sony Alpha 7R +44 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ProfHankD
Senior MemberPosts: 1,947Gear list
Like?
About the lenses
In reply to Geedorama, 7 months ago

For what it's worth, I think the strength of Sony's line is the lenses... just not lenses branded Sony.

Although Canon and Nikon have larger lens lines, nobody really has a lens line that is best-in-class in every slot. For example, the Minolta/Sony 135mm STF lens has no serious competitors from Canon, Nikon, nor anybody else. They key is to get away from being stuck with lenses from one brand.

The 4/3 and u4/3 idea was to team-up brands, and it has sort-of worked, but not all that impressively. I think the problem is that 4/3 sensors are a size that there were not a pile of old lens designs waiting for.

You also can trade being stuck with one lens brand for being stuck with one mount just by change of attitude: there are 3rd-party lenses for all mounts that people often forget or dismiss. For example, Sigma has dominated the ultrawide market for some time independent of which mount the lens has. However, that just gets you 3rd party lenses, not lenses from competitors.

Sony makes the best sensors. The E/FE bodies are leveraging that by allowing you to stick just about any lens intended for FF or APS-C in front of them -- even lenses made by competing brands. Yeah, Sony hasn't taken the scary and impolite step of making adapters for other folks lenses themselves, but who cares? All that has to happen is fast AF with adapted lenses and it is game over for other body makers. (Although many of those competing bodies use Sony sensors, so Sony wins either way.) Interestingly, fast AF even with most manual lenses is technically feasible on an E/FE mount (I know because I've seriously considered commercially building such an adapter). We just don't have that adapter yet, and Sony's AF algorithms from the LA-EA1 are too slow. It will be interesting to see if Sony focus speed on non-native lenses is improved on the A6000....

Why have Canon and Nikon continued to dominate the market? Because they're there. Go to a department store or big-box store and try to buy a Sony. They don't have them. Sony hasn't yet learned how to get product on shelves and into store displays. This is probably based in the rigid way in which Sony lets stores get and sell their product. In my opinion, that's the thing Sony has to fix -- and they could.

 ProfHankD's gear list:ProfHankD's gear list
Canon PowerShot A640 Canon PowerShot A720 IS Canon PowerShot S70 Canon PowerShot G1 Canon PowerShot G5 +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rrccad
Senior MemberPosts: 2,675Gear list
Like?
Re: With regard to Canikon lenses…….
In reply to hip2, 7 months ago

hip2 wrote:

rrccad wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

DFPanno wrote:

Just an aside:

It is important to note that while Canikon has a wide array of lenses, many of them are outdated and cannot keep up with currents sensors let alone the sensor tech that may be coming down the pike.

In truth both companies may have have 5-10 lenses each that are ready for the future.

without even trying i'm up to 18 FF canon lenses. I doubt nikon is much different.

You must also be betting on that mirror is forever or that these lenses will seamlessly transition into mirrorless bodies?

canon / nikon could remove the mirror and leave the registration distance. they could even do hybrid systems where the mirror is only used in specific cases and not in others. going mirrorless doesn't necessarily mean adopting a different mount. while there is advantages - for a full frame sensor and professional grade lenses, the different in kit bulk is pretty trivial. you're not going to save any room with a 300/400/500 super telephoto setup between a registration distance of 44mm and 18mm.

Right now with over 80 million F mount lenses and 100 million EF mount lenses and nearly 15 million each and every year, the EF/F mount increase their installed base over any other mount. I suspect that the odds are pretty good on the survivability of the mounts.

I'd bet on that mass far more than for instance .. FE mount?

how many of your 18 lenses are ready for the 36Mpix of the A7R and the D800E ?

300/2.8, 400/2.8, 500/4 and 600/4. TSE17,24. 35,24,28 IS, 100m IS macro, 200-400/4IS, 24-70/2.8II, 70-200/2.8II, 70-200/4IS, 200/2, debatable 40/2.8, 85/1.2, 135/2, 24-70/4IS,

That's off the top of my head for canon .. hard to argue with any of that list.

 rrccad's gear list:rrccad's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS M
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads