the new sony alpha?

Hi, have u seen the new sony alpha (ex-konica-minolta) reflex camera?

-10MP

• anti dust system
• Image stabilization incorporated to the CCD

and tha classical, minolta lens, and several ZEISS lens coming!

and fot just €1000 with a 18-70 (x1,6)

I think it's amazing that for €2500 canon is selling a 12MP without IS and without anti-dust system, don't you?

This new arriving product is going to boost the competition....and that's good for us!!! jejeje

A much more direct comparison is a 30D which is the same class of camera as the Alpha. You can't compare cost of a full frme sensor camera with an APS-C camera as the cost of manufacturing the sensor alone is dramatically higher. IC manufacturing costs go up exponentially with chip area not linearly.

--
EJP

Is the Alpha FF?

Oh yea. It isn't so the whole comparison is kinda stupid don't you agree?

Steven

--
---
Spring 2006:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/images_spring_2006

Well, I remind you that nikon don't make FF either and everybody agree on comparing canon and nikon. FF is beter ok, but there are some people that are still buying nikon cameras, so it's more like a personal choice.

So, I don't think this a stupid comparaison, taking in fact that there is prce diference of €1500.

panchoskywalker said:

Well, I remind you that nikon don't make FF either and everybody
agree on comparing canon and nikon. FF is beter ok, but there are
some people that are still buying nikon cameras, so it's more like
a personal choice.

Click to expand...

Sure you can compare anything ...

I'm sure the Sony is a nice camera.

panchoskywalker said:

So, I don't think this a stupid comparaison, taking in fact that
there is prce diference of €1500.

Click to expand...

...and, by the smell of things, it looks like the Sony is going to be playing catch-up time with Canon, at least on this first generation. Now, on the second, who knows.

Remember: IMAGE QUALITY is what really matters at the end of the day (of course, as long as it is not provided in a kid's Corn-Flakes kid box). And everybody is measured (including Canon) based on that standard, today.

Happy shooting!

panchoskywalker said:

Hi, have u seen the new sony alpha (ex-konica-minolta) reflex camera?

Click to expand...

No. It doesn't take EF lenses, so it really doesn't help me.

panchoskywalker said:

I think it's amazing that for €2500 canon is selling a 12MP without
IS and without anti-dust system, don't you?

Click to expand...

Not really. I've got close to 4,000 shots on my 5D so far, and it's got IS in the lens that needs it. It's also full frame. I don't think this is amazing at all. I would love it to have been cheaper, but I don't feel ripped off.

panchoskywalker said:

This new arriving product is going to boost the competition....and
that's good for us!!! jejeje

Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree competition is good for just about everybody. But I don't think the Sony really is competition. You might want to try this in the 4/3 or Sigma SLR forums.

What competion? It's not full frame so it's no competion.

--
---

'I have been a witness, and these pictures are
my testimony. The events I have recorded should
not be forgotten and must not be repeated.'
-James Nachtwey-
http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/

I had a chance to hold one the other day and for my money, it is a start but only that. Biggest feature to me is the dust removal feature. Kind of reminded me of a slightly better constructed Minolta--isn't that suprising. The lenses feel real cheap. Also it remains to be seen if the Zeiss lenses are the real deal are just using the name. Most of the upper end P&S Sonys all had "Zeiss" lenses. Only the R1 really gave anyone reason to believe it might be a real Zeiss lens. The rest weren't even as good as Minolta's cheaper lenses.

--
---
Spring 2006:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/images_spring_2006

--
---
Spring 2006:
http://www.pbase.com/snoyes/images_spring_2006

PIXSurgeon said:

...and, by the smell of things, it looks like the Sony is going to
be playing catch-up time with Canon, at least on this first
generation. Now, on the second, who knows.

Remember: IMAGE QUALITY is what really matters at the end of the
day (of course, as long as it is not provided in a kid's
Corn-Flakes kid box). And everybody is measured (including Canon)
based on that standard, today.

Happy shooting!

Click to expand...

One thing for sure I don't think we can blame the lenses for any possible IQ shortcomings the Sony might have. Those Ziess lenses are beautiful. In fact the new 135 f/1.8 is a pure work of art, possibly the nicest looking lens I've seen and I'll bet it performs too. If Canon would like to make me a 135 f/1.8L IS that would be most welcome.

I think given the dirt cheap price of the Sony, even if the IQ is only as good as the D200, it's a winner IMO.

The A100 is targeted against the 350D and D70. It's the bottom end camera of the line. Replaced minoltas 5D.

When they get a 7D replacement out, that goes against the 30D and D200

Hmmm, how about the 70-200/2.8. How much? @ $2+k - ouch!
Erm, I'd like the 300/2.8 too -- that's $6k please - ouch!
And a couple of TC's - ouch!

Yes, you may say the street price will be lower than the RRP - but don't expect a big drop

thx1138 said:

are beautiful. In fact the new 135 f/1.8 is a pure work of art,
possibly the nicest looking lens I've seen and I'll bet it performs
too. If Canon would like to make me a 135 f/1.8L IS that would be
most welcome.

Click to expand...

As opposed to the 135/2 L they have now? Having IS would be nice, but it's not that needful at this length. And on the other hand it would add 1/3 or 1/4 to the price of the lens, and hurt the image quality slightly.

panchoskywalker said:

I think it's amazing that for €2500 canon is selling a 12MP without
IS and without anti-dust system, don't you?

Click to expand...

First of all, you're comparing an APS-sensored camera against a FF-sensored camera. The size of the sensor has a significant impact on the cost of a camera. FF sensors are simply much more costly. Secondly, the 5D is closer to 13mp (it's a 12.8mp camera). Plus, for brisk shooting, the Sony only buffers 6 RAW frames, while the 5D buffers 17 RAW frames (almost triple what the Sony will do). Plus, it also comes down to image quality.

First off, this camera is nothing like the 5D. If you educate yourself on chips you will see FF is much more costly to make and has different optical effects than an aps-c chip.

While the Alpha features are nice but it appeals to entry level and serious users. A 5D users is a different market.

The Zeiss brand used to be exciting to me when I used it with Hasselblad. Now that they have licensed the name out on point and shoots and consumer camcorders they are less appealing. I have yet to see any indicators that a zeiss optic makes a night and day difference with the exception of the 21mm. To even get the sharp corners of that you need a FF chip. Something Sony doesn't have. Plus the Zeiss lens they have in the pipeline are variable aperture. Too much to pay for that.

Competition is good and I expect prices to go down. This camera will not affect high end sales though.

panchoskywalker said:

Hi, have u seen the new sony alpha (ex-konica-minolta) reflex camera?

-10MP

• anti dust system
• Image stabilization incorporated to the CCD

and tha classical, minolta lens, and several ZEISS lens coming!

and fot just €1000 with a 18-70 (x1,6)

I think it's amazing that for €2500 canon is selling a 12MP without
IS and without anti-dust system, don't you?
This new arriving product is going to boost the competition....and
that's good for us!!! jejeje

Click to expand...

panchoskywalker said:

Well, I remind you that nikon don't make FF either and everybody
agree on comparing canon and nikon. FF is beter ok, but there are
some people that are still buying nikon cameras, so it's more like
a personal choice.

So, I don't think this a stupid comparaison, taking in fact that
there is prce diference of €1500.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is a stupid comparison. The size of the sensor has a significant impact on the cost of a camera. FF sensors cost a lot more to make than APS sensors because the production yields on FF sensors are a lot less than for APS sensors. Read this:

http://news.techwhack.com/1878/canon-5d-is-finally-unveiled/

Excerpt:

"Canon manufactures its sensors from 8 inch wafers (200mm dia). One 8 inch wafer yields 20 FF sensors(if there are no defects) but presently yields are at 25 %. Seventy two 1.6x (22.7×15.1mm) sensors can be made from one 8 inch silicon wafer. Yields for 1.6x sensors per silicon wafer are at 70+ %. So therefore, with each LSI batch, there are about 5 usable FF sensors for every 50 1.6x sensors. At the time the 1Ds-Mk2 was released, yields were 10 % per wafer. With fewer usable FF sensors per wafer, production costs per sensor were significantly higher and this reflected on the 1Ds’s price when it was released."

So even if you could get 100% yields, you would only get 20 FF sensors from a silicon wafer for every 72 APS sensors! But yields are nowhere near 100%, and in fact, as the sensor gets larger the defect rate increases substantially, resulting in much lower yields than what you get with smaller sensors.

If you want to do a less stupid comparison, you should really be comparing the Sony Alpha A100 to the Nikon D200, since they basically use the same Sony 10mp sensor.

Don't round on the side to make your point look better - use scientific rounding. Why didn't you round Sony's 10.2 MP to 11??

Sony's is a wimp compared to the 5D. Sony has 4 RAW burst I believe to 5D 17. 1.6x cameras are just not wide angle cameras. I used my Drebel with my Sigma 12-24 today and 12mm cropped to 19mm just doesn't seem wide to me anymore after being on my 5D at true 12mm.

Sony's offering is entry level and is a weak offering at best.

LOL

KevinM
--
You like airplanes ?
Check out my airshow galleries. They are works in progress.

http://www.pbase.com/kevinpa