Sony vs Canon.....

Barry Fitzgerald · Jun 7, 2006

Murder canon....esp the rebel 350...

Too long at the top and nothing new....

I am going to love every minute of it!

RobertMartinu · Jun 7, 2006

Bernie_King said:
This is the thing I don't get. How long a focal length are you
talking about? I hand hold my Sigma 170-500 @ 500mm all the time
and have no problem keeping it steady enough to compose my shot.
The AS helps enormously since this lens is slow (f6.3), but I only
need it at exposure time. Heck, I usually don't get past one bar
on the AS meter.

Its not about composing, but about tracking a flying bird for example.
The IS makes it easier for the continuous AF to keep a lock.
(Esp. if you had no time to calm down after a long hike)
Not an unconditional necessarity, but a welcome aid!

RDKirk · Jun 7, 2006

Well, there is an interview from Mr Iwashita, Canon imaging CEO, that Canon's P&S sensors certainly are not made by Canon, and at the time, there Canon had no intention of producing its own sensors for its P&S cameras.

--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'

Skip M · Jun 7, 2006

thx1138 said:
Skip M said:

Sony's using the 10 mp sensor from the D200 in a camera priced to
compete with the 6mp D50. Wow, that might be an incentive for
Nikon to either switch suppliers or start developing their own
sensors. Yeah, I know it's a plastic body without the marvelous
environmental sealing of the D200, but with most consumers, it's
all about the pixel count, and the body certainly holds up in
comparison to the D50 and D70s.
--
Skip M
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

Click to expand...

Just because it's plastic doesn't mean its rubbish. No one would
deny the EOS 3 was a well built camera. Phil Askey said the Sony
feels much better built than a 350D and handles much better.

I neither said nor implied that "just because it's plastic" it's "rubbish." And I don't think the EOS 3 was plastic. The EOS 5 was, and it was an excellent camera. The only reason I mentioned that the Sony was plastic was that someone was sure to point out that it lacked the build quality of the D200.
--
Skip M
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

theswede #100093 · Jun 7, 2006

They're going after the Sony buyer market, which is huge.

Lemming51 · Jun 7, 2006

Petteri Sulonen said:
The new "Carl Zeiss" lenses have nothing Zeiss about them other
than the brand and supposedly "approval of the quality control
process." Marketing, IOW. They're designed and built by Sony. I've
no doubt they'll be excellent lenses, though.

http://www.zeiss.de/C12567A100537AB9/allBySubject/Press2

"Carl Zeiss AG will equip the new Sony Alpha DSLR camera, announced today, with a range of high performance autofocus lenses. These lenses are designated "ZA" signifying ZEISS lens for Sony Alpha mount."

nimnar · Jun 7, 2006

which would be talk with Canon EF lenses.
--
Nimnar

Petteri Sulonen · Jun 7, 2006

Lemming51 said:
Petteri Sulonen said:

The new "Carl Zeiss" lenses have nothing Zeiss about them other
than the brand and supposedly "approval of the quality control
process." Marketing, IOW. They're designed and built by Sony. I've
no doubt they'll be excellent lenses, though.

Click to expand...

http://www.zeiss.de/C12567A100537AB9/allBySubject/Press2

"Carl Zeiss AG will equip the new Sony Alpha DSLR camera, announced
today, with a range of high performance autofocus lenses. These
lenses are designated "ZA" signifying ZEISS lens for Sony Alpha
mount."

That press release is carefully worded not to say who actually designs and builds those lenses. Sony and CZ do their best to obfuscate their relationship in the press; it's not the first time it's being discussed: [ http://www.dpreview.com/news/0103/01031301sonycarlzeiss.asp ].

So believe what you like. I'm not buying it though.

Petteri
--
Me on photography: [ http://www.prime-junta.net/ ]
My RSS feed: [ http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/rss/whatsnew.xml ]
My flickr page: [ http://www.flickr.com/photos/primejunta/ ]

notpc · Jun 7, 2006

So does the fact that Canon limits the 350D to 1600 suggest that it doesn't perform well?

semorg said:
semorg wrote:
1, For one thing, Sony would have announced a high ISO of 3200. The
fact they are limiting it to 1600 tells me it will not perform that
well.

Brian Ripley · Jun 7, 2006

Petteri Sulonen said:
Lemming51 said:

Petteri Sulonen said:

The new "Carl Zeiss" lenses have nothing Zeiss about them other
than the brand and supposedly "approval of the quality control
process." Marketing, IOW. They're designed and built by Sony. I've
no doubt they'll be excellent lenses, though.

Click to expand...

http://www.zeiss.de/C12567A100537AB9/allBySubject/Press2

"Carl Zeiss AG will equip the new Sony Alpha DSLR camera, announced
today, with a range of high performance autofocus lenses. These
lenses are designated "ZA" signifying ZEISS lens for Sony Alpha
mount."

Click to expand...

Yes, but in this particular case people who know the Zeiss range
claim to recognize the 85mm. E.g.

http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/

says it is the same lens as the ZF 85/1.4 and Contax and other
earlier versions.

Petteri Sulonen said:
That press release is carefully worded not to say who actually
designs and builds those lenses. Sony and CZ do their best to
obfuscate their relationship in the press; it's not the first time
it's being discussed: [
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0103/01031301sonycarlzeiss.asp ].

So believe what you like. I'm not buying it though.

Petteri
--
Me on photography: [ http://www.prime-junta.net/ ]
My RSS feed: [ http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/rss/whatsnew.xml ]
My flickr page: [ http://www.flickr.com/photos/primejunta/ ]

--
for equipment see profile.

Arto · Jun 7, 2006

I have had three different Sonys; S70, PC9 and one Hi8-cam. All of them still functioning like new pieces.

So, I do think Sony makes great electronics, and I hope that will be the case with their new DSLR to, as much as I hope their new (in the future) lenses will be top notch.

Bur for me it will be Canon for long time. To much money in lenses makes switches slow. Maybe after the EOS-line is dead and we need to invest in new systems. I hope SOny is still in the business then...

--
Arto Pääkkönen @ http://www.pphoto.se

mouse07410 · Jun 7, 2006

Don't forget 500/f.8.0 mirror tele with AUTOFOCUS, quite reasonably priced.

tellingthm · Jun 7, 2006

canon started putting AS into the bodies, but had some sort of sensor to determine if the lens (in this case, a super-tele) had IS as well, and therefore the body's AS would not be activated. or it could be a custom function to automatically disable AS when using a lens equipped w/ IS.

consumers aside, there are plenty of pros that have to buy their own gear, and having some form of IS/AS available regardless of the lens used would certainly be of interest to a lot of em.

--
come on!

semorg · Jun 7, 2006

notpc said:
So does the fact that Canon limits the 350D to 1600 suggest that it
doesn't perform well?

Not at all but canon did not limit the ISO on their first camera entry into the market.

notpc said:
notpc said:

semorg wrote:
1, For one thing, Sony would have announced a high ISO of 3200. The
fact they are limiting it to 1600 tells me it will not perform that
well.

Click to expand...

--
My Latest Gallery: From Peru to Chile: http://www.pbase.com/salim/peruchile2005

Legacys_Quest7 · Jun 7, 2006

nope, i mean just solely for a alpha100 camera. that is wasting money and time. common sense.

Dirk Dittert said:
Dirk Dittert said:

You don't just build a series
on lenses high end at that just for the h@ll of it.

Click to expand...

You mean something like a $5k lens for a $900 body? SCNR This is
really going to be interesting, especially how Nikon will react to
this.

--
http://www.legacys-photo.com

maxz · Jun 7, 2006

remember last year when Sony had a batch of bad CCDs, how many digital camera makers were affected? that included canon, ricoh, KM, Fuji, and Nikon. Some even joked that sony did it on purpose, just to demonstrate who's really the player behind the digital imaging industry, despite there's a hundred different brand names out there.

remove the back shell of your canon (or nikon or KM or Pentax etc) DSLR and you will see a big SONY logo on the bottom of the back LCD screen. It's almost safe to say for every DC or DSLR sold, sony made money.

Leos · Jun 7, 2006

Skip M said:
And I don't think the EOS 3 was plastic.

It was plastic - im almost sure.

Skip M said:
The EOS 5 was [plastic]

It wasnt ??!!! Im almost sure...

Kai Hui · Jun 7, 2006

some wedding photographers are still D60/10D. One actually using Sony point and shoot.

I bumped into one lady in the mall last weekend. She said she is a photographer. She use a tiny Kodak digicam.

Your works speaks of whetehr you are pro or not, not your gear.

thepaladin · Jun 7, 2006

does this thing fit into film bodies I'm just curious?
85mm 1.4 and 135 1.8, well, they sound like they should!!!

--
Nikon freak!
http://myhanoi.fotopic.net/

Pepe-Lepue · Jun 7, 2006

is your life so dull that this is how you get your kicks?
MAN!!! Get a LIFE!

(FYI . . . sitting around getting your excitement out of camera company wars in which you have no invested interest in is NOT a LIFE)

Barry Fitzgerald said:
Murder canon....esp the rebel 350...

Too long at the top and nothing new....

I am going to love every minute of it!

--
'I am ze locksmith of love, no?'
Stephen Reed

http://www.pbase.com/domotang

Sony vs Canon.....

Barry Fitzgerald

Guest

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Leading Member

Forum Enthusiast

Well-known member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts