Operator: Last exit to get the break even, otherwise it's "Game Over" for Sonys camera business.
Not a big deal, the sensors department is still doing a excellent job and will survive ...
Actually, the original article doesn't state anything like that and the CEO has already specifically said Sony Imaging is here to stay on several recent occasions, which also fits the strategy as presented:http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/IR/info/strategy/
Based on what exactly? From interviews and presentations, Sony says both contribute, while collapsing lower- and mid end compact cameras plus camcorder sales are taking away from those profits.
Double digit operating profits for the Imaging division as we speak (sames goes for the other division called Devices, which includes sensors). I think you need to update that theory. ;-)
jonathanj: Surprise surprise ... Sony make really great cameras but poor systems, they just don't seem to realize that some people want to buy into a system and stick with it.Canon in contrast make a great system but mediocre cameras. The fact they're doing better than Sony indicates that most people don't want or need the latest technology, but they don't necessary want everything they buy to be worthless 5 years later when the system is dumped for something else.
Financial reports from both companies, just released and the percentages from last year's IDC reports and this year's Sony report.
RedDog Steve: I suspect the only way to truly "target current full-frame camera users" would be to equip the camera with either a Canon or Nikon full-frame lens mount.
By Just a Photographer:"You clearly have never used the 85mm f1.2. So are some other lenses that can not be used or are incompatible."
You clearly have no idea what you're talking about. On their website, Metabones specifically states they tested the 85mm f/1.2 with success.
Your sole purpose here seems to spread FUD and misinform people with proven nonsense. Talk about agendas indeed.
tietheknot: This is hardly news for anyone who follows Sony. Sony's focus has been on full frame since the first A7(r) was released. It's not to say they got rid of their APS-C bodies altogether.
As a user of an APS-C E-mount body, am I concerned about their shift in focus? Not really, other than that it means my current APS-C lenses lose much more resale value than I would've liked.
Does it mean that there are fewer lenses to for me to use? NO. Remember (especially to those moaning about lenses) that FE lenses can still be used on APS-C bodies. And they work great. Love my newly acquired FE 28 and FE 70-200 on my NEX 5R.
Why are people so negative? Have no clue. Misinformed fanboys maybe?
Tele lens designs (roughly from about 70mm up) are similar in size for APS-C and FF bodies in general due to physics. That's the reason why you won't see many (if any) of those made for APS-C only if the mount circle covers both formats, regardless of mount brand (see also Canon and Nikon). There's simply no point in limiting it that way.
The NEXR is made from magnesium alloy btw.
Again false, there are no lens elements in the way using the correct adapter.
"The difference is that Canon an Nikon outsell Sony by 7 to 8 times when it comes down to numbers"
A) Looking at imaging as a whole, the difference between Canon and Sony is a factor 2 in terms of sales value.B) Looking at ILC's, the difference is less than a factor 4 (11% share for Sony, Canon 38-40%).
I was talking about the trend in the numbers, which tells us something about the current market shift too.
Just a Photographer: Sony Sensor production as an OEM component manufacturer.Sony Camera production is part of their Imaging Division and which is part of their Consumer Product line.
Two different companies.
Both are subsidiaries of the same company.
TriezeA72: With Canon's EVF'less junk, and this nice but limited in reach expensive RX10ii, it really makes the FZ1000 stand out as the best value for money in this category of cameras, you get reasonable reach, 4k, sharp lens, great AF and an EVF for $600/700
You're right, I was mistakingly thinking it was the field sequential EVF.
Better is relative. Canon sees its camera sales and profits shrinking (at a double digit pace), Sony sees the opposite.
"lenses sized for the sensor"
Like those CaNikon FF 70-200 f/2.8 or f/4 zooms used on crop bodies for example?
ogl: It seems to me only sensor business helps SONY to live.
Like I said, read the report.
Last year, the quarter ending june 30 showed a 10.6% operating profit for the *Imaging division*, this year that's 12.5% (21.3 billion yen operating income on 170.4 sales+revenues).
The division Devices (largest contributor being Imaging Sensors), showed a 12.7% operating profit for the same period at 30.3 billion yen.
Thomas Richter: Problem is, Sony does not have a single decent standard zoom for any of their mirrorless systems.
Both points were made and I already refuted the heavy and huge part in my first post. The Canon 24-70 of comparable brightness is almost 30% larger in volume and >40% heavier than the Sony 24-70mm for the E mount.
I'm talking about the 24-70 intended for mirrorless cameras (see the first posting being about mirrorless cameras). The 24-70 ZA you're talking about is designed for cameras with mirrors.
So no, I'm not confused.
"I've heard camera business is not profitable"
Read the report, it is profitable. Operating profit margin of the Imaging division is currently in the double digits.
Photato: Not impressed.Tiny 20 megapixels crammed in a 1" sensor is definitely consumerish and it shows. Too bad because that spoils what is otherwise a really nice camera.Sony, let me know when you put 8MP in 1". Like the one you make for Industrial Applications.....You know like the serious stuff for grown ups.
"Lumix DMC-FZ1000 creams the RX10 Mark II, and is probably on par or slightly better than RX10 Mark I."
This notion that the Mark I is somehow better than the Mark II is getting comical when the Mark II has the same lens and a (slightly) better sensor.
According to DXOmark mtf measurements, the 24-70 f4 is optically similar to the Canon 24-70 f4 (similar sharpness uniformity at 24mm, better between 35-50mm, a tad worse at 70mm) but smaller in volume and weight.
But you lose light, weather sealing and EVF quality. Still a good price for tge Panasonic though.
maxnimo: The first thing I noticed is that this sensor is really struggling to capture fine detail, like vegetation, even at low ISO. I believe they crammed too many pixels in it.
That's a great contradiction.