roustabout66: I would not feel very comfortable owning a Sony camera now. My understanding is that most of any profits generated were by sensors not cameras.
If your first post has absolutely nothing to do with this news item about Sony sensors splitting from device division to form a new company, why on earth did you post that comment in the news article?
Are you an idiot or something? Do you always post random comments in irrelevant news articles? Are you mentally retarded?
Plus I already showed you that most profit do not come from sensors. In 2014 device division lost money while cameras still made money. Even if what you said were true, so what? What matters is that cameras are making profit and not losing money.
As for Canon, come back when they can make a sensor that can outperform the 2007 12 MP CMOS sensor. That's a company lagging behind in technology 8 years, and still counting
Yes, your first post was clearly fud based on ignorance and wishful thinking by a Canon fanboy who is commenting on a news item about Sony sensor manufacturing. I don't care how many cameras you own from Nikon. Your posting history clearly indicates that you are a Canon fanboy. Don't worry, fanboy, perhaps Canon will finally produce a sensor in the next 7 years that can finally beat the 12 MP CMOS sensor made in 2007.
Your first post was clear. You were posting fud implying verthing that I mentioned earlier. And your posting history is clear too: you are a canon fanboy
"Where is that equal to ANY of your claims that I have said?"
You are posting on a news report about Sony sensors becoming a new company. You even added the word "now" to first sentence too indicate direct correlation to this news report.
Now that you have been shown to be an ignorant clown, you are back tracking. Good to know. You have never shown that Sony's 35mm cameras are losing money, by the way. Good to know that you learned something and are now more educated.
As a Canon fanboy commenting on other brands, you should be more concerned about the fact that Canon has not yet surpassed the performance of Sony sensor from 2007 (12 MP CMOS in D90). Poor Canon is behind by at least 7 years, and the clock is still ticking.
Read your original post, moron.
"I would not feel very comfortable owning a Sony camera now. My understanding is that most of any profits generated were by sensors not cameras."
What was point of that idiotic post when yous said most of profit was generated by sensors? Sony isn't selling sensor division. They still own it. And sensors were never part of imaging division and imaging division has not lost money for several years (unlike device division, which did lose money in 2014)
Here is the report from latest quarter
Tell us how imaging division is going anywhere when it's making money?
You are just anther Canon fanboy having wet dreams. Too bad your wet dreams are based on ignorance, not facts. You are an ignorant clown.
In 2014 devices division reported a loss of (12.4) billion yen. Imagining division has not reported a loss in several years now.
"Operating income of 93.1 billion yen (776 million U.S. dollars) was recorded, compared to an operating loss of 12.4 billion yen in the previous fiscal year." (that's under devices division)
You said exactly what I quoted above. You are just a Canon fanboy with wet dreams of Sony shutting down their profitable Imaging businesses. Plus you are an ignorant idiot. Inform yourself of facts first before posting.
Albert Silver: "This explains how the a7R II has managed to record the best high-ISO DR that DxO has yet measured."
You mean the SECOND best. The Sony A7s is no.1
BSI sensor doesn't benefit larger pixels. That's probably why A7s sensor, which has uge pixels, isn't BSI.
Your posts didn't answer my original question. A7s blows the crap out every other still cameras, including NX1, in video. Why do you think A7s II won't do the same?
Coming from someone who posted an idiotic comment like I quoted above without knowing any facts about the topic.
(1) Sensors were never part of camera division(2) Camera division hasn't lost money in several years. Device division, sensors were part of that division, did lose money in 2015 (3) Sony would still own the new company, Sony Semiconductor Solutions Corporation, so the profits from sensors aren't going anywhere.
Your posts had absolutely no facts and was based on just random wishful wet dreams by some fanboy of different brand
Herp Photos: Good! Hopefully this ends the rumor or reality that Sony holds back their newest sensors from the likes of Fuji, Pentax and Nikon for 6 months so that Sony's own cameras can use them first.
Herp Photos, exactly. A company exists to make money, not to make people like you happy, and just splitting a profitable business for no reason isn't making money. There is no reason to believe that the new company wouldn't just be a subsidiary 100% owned by Sony.
You implied everything I mentioned with this idiotic post:
Two sentences full of idiotic implications based on ignorance. You are an ignorant clown.
That's not true, moron. Most of Sony's profit according to 2015 report were actually from their finance business. I believe Device division, sensors were part of it, lost money. Imaging division (cameras and stuff) was profitable, like it has been for several years now.
Second, Sony isn't selling sensor division. Even if it's a new company, that company is still 100% owned by Sony. So the profits from sensors would still be part of Sony's profit. Your post was idiotic.
Your post was based on ignorance. Thus, you are an ignorant clown.
roustabout66 , I didn't make it up. There was logical reasonong behind it. The cameras division was profitable last few few years, and A7 series were the main cameras Sony was selling these last few years.
As for your claim, you originally said most of the profits were generated by sensors, not cameras. You were wrong. Sensors were never part of camera division. That's why I said you are just some random ignorant clown, even if you are not a troll. Thanks for confirming that
naththo, A7s blows the crap out every other still cameras, including NX1, in video. Why do you think A7s II won't do the same?
Well, just as I thought, you made up the part that 35mm isn't profitable. Where is your evidence? Let me guess. You don't have any.
The imaging division was profitable for past several years. What cameras have Sony released in past 3 years? FF and A6000.
Now it's your turn to show that 35mm isn't profitable
First, 35mm is profitable, second, yes large sensor video is merging with still cameras, so larger sensors aren't going anywhere.
Sony will soon release 65mm sensor camera when F65is upgraded.R&D that went into A7rII sensor directly benefits F65 II and vice versa.
RedFox88 is long term Canon troll. roustabout66 is not a troll. Just ignorant. You (Pocket NEX) however are a full time troll (M4/3) with several dozen sock pocket accounts.
roustabout66 , video and still cameras are merging. This is especially true for larger sensors (APSC, 35mm., and even larger 65mm, Alexa 65). Red Dragon has sensor that is larger than super35mm but smaller than 35mm This is bread and butter for Sony pro division, which is part of still camera division now, so these cameras are not going anywhere in your lifetime. R&D is interconnected now due to merging of large sensor pro video and what were traditionally still cameras
Pocket NEX sounds like a sockpuppet of some well known m4/3 troll.
Dream on, buddy. The Sony cameras are making money, unlike M4/3, Samsung, and Ricoh.
roustabout66, you missed my point. Cameras were never a part of sensor division. They are part of Imaging Products & Solutions which includes Sony pro video division which is a core Sony's businesses that provides accessories to broadcast networks. Video and still cameras are merging, so Sony cameras are not going anywhere in your lifetime.
roustabout66, camera division was never part of sensor division. Cameras are part of more profitable Sony pro video division which makes cameras and accessories for Hollywood and Broadcast TV. That's why cameras are not going anywhere in your lifetime.