Emadn13: a6300 will destroy this in all the categories,specially low light you can see it herehttps://www.instagram.com/p/BDXfDCoLP0W/?taken-by=mr.doorbin:D the difference is huge
The Sony is FAR behind is service and support so it hardly destroys in all the categories. People who want reliable cameras they can get repaired in a reasonable time frame will continue to purchase Canon and Nikon over Sony.
The difference in system ability and service and support is huge.
SwedishPhoto: Love the photos! Great video :-)But, I see that you've taped the camera brand on your camera. I know some pros etc do this. But personally I've never really understood why..
If it's to cover it up for thieves, I still don't get it. The tape itself make any experienced thief wanting it even more. And most often you can see that the camera and lens looks big and expensive.I'm curious to what your reason is :-)
Is it to not be branded as a "Canon/Nikon guy" etc?Is it for some legal reason (I can't see what though)?
I'm just curious to your reason :-)
Several people have asked the same question and so far I have not seen a cogent answer. For the record it is a Canon 5dsr
Weegee: Donald Trump already already "hosyed" his! And what the Donald wants, the Donald gets! I hear he's getting #1
And how many billions are you worth?
justmeMN: It's about time that DPR had an article about a Sony camera. You have been completely ignoring that brand. :-)
Yes, some of their new lenses are really interesting.
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.
Canon, Canon, Canon...man you got it bad! Just go ahead and buy one and get it over with. If you buy a Canon then you can fondle long AND fat lenses while you read your DXO charts.
Dumping on you man.....just dumping on you.
So do you obsess over Canon's big thick fat F1.2 lenses or do you prefer the long white super telephotos?
The only way my ass hurts is from dumping on you.
What is this obsession you have with Canon that you KEEP bringing up Canon in a Sony thread. You really need to seek help with this compulsive behavior! Maybe if you were to ACTUALLY OWN a camera this obsession with Canon would be cured.
But YOU brought up Canon in a Sony thread, not me. You must be the Canon fanboy.
If the new story is about Sony sensors why did you bring up canon cameras?
I said what I said and stick by it. I am not worried about the future of Canon cameras. Are you worried about the future of Sony cameras?It's beginning to look as if you are one of those measurebators who like to sit around playing with themselves while they read DXO charts.
Do you own any cameras...if so what?
My first post said that I would not want to own a Sony camera now and most profits were from sensors not cameras. All of that is still true. I will happily stick to known quantities like Canon and Nikon. Does your non-response mean you do not actually OWN any cameras? If you do own any are you ashamed to name them?
My first post WAS clear...unlike the rambling disjointed lies you have posted. I said I own Canon cameras so I guess to you that makes me a "fanboy" but what about my 3 Nikon cameras and 10 Nikon lenses? Am I a Nikon fanboy too? Can I be a Canon fanboy AND a Nikon fanboy? Do you even own any cameras or lenses? What brands? Are you a fanboy for that brand?
Backtracking? I have been consistent in saying Sony makes more on sensors that digital 35. You REALLY have a reading comprehension problem. Maybe you can get you mom to help you with it. I never said Sony's 35mm is losing money and you are a LIAR to keep repeating that. As far as a Canon fanboy, Canon seems to be doing OK and my last camera purchase was a Nikon D7100...so you are WRONG once again.
"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." Where is that equal to ANY of your claims that I have said?
You have shown NOTHING...NOTHING that shows Sony makes more money from 35mm cameras than it does from sensors. You keep arguing against claims I never made. You keep referencing reports that show an ENTIRE DIVISION. I own 3 Nikon cameras 4 Canon cameras and 1 Fuji so I am a Canon fanboy?W hat a moron you are! I claimed and still claim Sony makes more PROFIT from sensors than cameras. Sony IS killing off dead wood like A mount and I would not buy any Sony camera at this point given their history of deserting products on a dare.
Why do you continue to lie? Quote where I said sensors were part of camera division, camera division was losing money, and Sony did no longer own sensors or you are a liar.
First, Thom's quote is for the last quarter, your link is for a fiscal year. Second, do you even understand the document you referenced? It states SALES were DOWN 2.9% Income was up 107% because of CURRENCY EXCHANGE RATES, REDUCTION IN EXPENSES, improved product mix "PARTIALLY OFFSET by the DECREASE IN SALES OF DIGITAL CAMERAS AND VIDEO CAMERAS.Your own document says digital camera sales are down! I also notice it DOES NOT break out digital cameras from video which IS profitable.
Talk about idiotic comments without fact, you are the poster child for that. I never said ANY of the things you claim in your wet dream post. Quote where I said them or you are a liar. As far as facts, I trust that Thom Hogan follows this stuff pretty closely and he said on his site:
"The groups that are being spun out into the new entity provided 11% of Sony’s sales and half their profits in the past quarter." so I think my comment about sensor profits vs camera profits holds true. Show proof of your claims or you are just having another wet dream.
"Implied" And since you can not back up your claims you are a liar....and an ignorant fanboy clown.
You certainly are a moron and a liar. Where did I say Sony was selling the sensor division? Either show the quote where I said that or you are a liar.
ET2, The ignorant clown is YOU for making claims you can not back up. Once again you just make crap up. I never said they were in the same division. I said most of any of Sony's profits were from sensors not cameras AND THAT IS TRUE! Sensors are one of the few bright spots for Sony from a profit stand point. Stop making stuff up...you just look childish.
Where did I say 35MM was not profitable? You made that up as well. I said IF it was not profitable Sony would sell or close it. YOU said it was profitable. You have NO proof it is profitable because Sony does not report that way. You just made it up that 35MM was profitable. Why not just admit you have no proof and move on?