Reading mode: Light Dark

Who said in-body VR meant less money spent on lenses?

Go to last post
If you're never going to be shooting on film ever again, then in camera OS makes sense....

I suspect Nikon still sees a lot of film users, and decided that they're going to look after them too! ;)

Try using OS on an old film bodied KM or Pentax, huh! ;)
 
holy moly....I'd switch brands if that was my only choice....

Didn't Sony do a price check?
--
http://dwinnert.zenfolio.com
D200, D70s, Ricoh GR, Canon A620
Nikon 70-300VR, Sigma 18-50/2.8, Nikon 50/1.8 and 35/2.0
 
Obviously all the Sony and KM users are well aware of the differences. (That's one of the reason's why a ton of folks are leaving again.) But if one is a simple happy consumer snapper, the in-body system does indeed kick price butt. But it's silly to compare only a single ridiculous lens price when there are some far less egregious examples out there. And there are a ton of lenses where Nikon or Canon don't offer IS/VR and any KM/Sony (and Pentax) or 3rd party lens used does get the advantage of the AS.
 
Is it just me or does Sony not have a wide to normal 2.8 zoom? I don't see one there.

All of there lenses are really really expensive. They do look pretty decent in terms of specs but so expensive. You gotta give them credit for having this much of a lens line to coincide with the launch of their first DSLR. Then again, maybe they're just rebranded Minolta lenses. In that case...

--
-Mike
http://www.pbase.com/ghostrider25

'Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line.'
 
Raymond Bradlau said:
Maybe that is list price? it is really new after all
Click to expand...
The production capacity required for the Sony launch was approximately ten times that of the past Minolta/KM production, and the Sakai lens plant - where these exceptional bits of glass are made - is a small unit which used to have about eight teams of five workers, called Quality Circles, assembling the lenses by hand much in the same way that Hasselblad worked.

Sony has experimented with having versions of the lenses made in China, where Minolta had a part-owned facility with Shanghai Optical Company, to whom they licenced the rights for the old manual focus system. In mid-2006 they also tried (apparently) to see whether the Chinese plant with its lower costs could make the new Zeiss designs. Towards the end of 2006, they pulled the Zeiss out of China and sent it to Japan. We don't know whether the Sakai optical works (former KM) or the regular Zeiss partners (Cosina), or a totally new facility, is involved.

At present the demand for lenses far exceeds the supply, and Sony has a pretty rigorous policy on price-cutting. They maintain franchised chains of Sony shops, and in order to ensure that these are not undercut to the point of being forced to close - and remove their High Street/mall presence - they monitor the prices of other dealers, and will close accounts if an insufficient margin to allow profitable trading with adequate staff levels and service is taken. They make any decision to lower prices centrally, and pass this on with lower wholesale prices. You can already see this process with the mass-produced A100 bodies and kit lenses (where the Chinese facility is considered adequate); before Christmas with the Tamron-made 18-200mm; and shortly with the flash units, which are of course not made by Sony any more than Nikon's are made by Nikon, and are a mass-produced item with the potential to expand volume supply easily.

The 70-200mm SSM is a hand-built lens in an age of machine-built lenses and is genuinely one of the best. It's a pity it can't even track my dog running towards me on the Alpha 100, but that's a failing of an entry-level camera body (it does fine on an older 7 film body). Minolta only ever sold this lens in hundreds, not thousands. In the case of the 300mm f2.8, you were talking dozens at the most per country per year. For the 600mm f4, a year after it was launched there were still only three of these in the UK, and one was a grey import secured by a dealer. Like the Zeiss (Hasselblad) 300mm, these lenses were made in batches of roughly 100 units because the glass varies from batch to batch. The curvature and position of the elements is adjusted after measuring the qualities of the glass, which was melted by Minolta's own works from a mix of ingredients obtained as usual from Schott, Hoya and probably other sources. When the batch of lenses is made, a provision of around 10 per cent of the run is set aside as spare parts. You can't replace an element in one of these lenses unless a matched spare is held, and when enough of the spares are gone, replacement of glass ceased to be an option though mechanical parts can be fixed. A skilled repairer may be able to adjust shim spacing with a non-matched element and get a good result.

While demand for KM/Alpha lenses exceeds supply, Sony is unlikely to drop the price to compete with Nikon or Canon. The situation is similar to the first weeks of Nikon VR18-200 supply, only with Sony, it's likely to be first months with lenses like the 70-200 or 300. They have employed most of the engineering staff from Sakai, whose expertise is mainly in hand assembly of very high quality instruments and glass. As to whether they open a larger Japanese lens-making facility, improve automation, reduce labour, lower costs, change designs to use less batch measurement of glass characteristics etc - time will tell.

The problem is not that the lenses are desperately over-priced - they are at the top end of their genre, from a workshop which got a decade of training and QC from Leitz - but that they are totally mismatched to an entry-level digital SLR body. If there was a $3,000 titanium full framer to go with the G SSM apo teles, wouldn't be so bad.

Or, if Sony was able - or willing - to reintroduce the excellent former Minolta APO (D) 100-300mm f4.5-5.6 to give a really sharp tele zoom option around $600, they would have a better match to the A100 body. At present all they have is a cheap 75-300mm which is optically not too bad but on a level with the similar kit Nikon cheapie, probably much the same lens. Jump from that at $189 or whatever, to thousands, nothing between.

David
 
David Kilpatrick said:
The 70-200mm SSM is a hand-built lens in an age of machine-built lenses and is genuinely one of the best. > It's a pity it can't even track my dog running towards me on the Alpha 100, but that's a failing of an entry-> level camera body (it does fine on an older 7 film body).
Click to expand...
Minolta film SLRs were renowned for their predictive autofocus, so what happened when they went over to digital? - With much faster processing shouldn't it work better? I'm just curious to try and understand the reason for this.
--
David
 
braeside said:
braeside said:
The 70-200mm SSM is a hand-built lens in an age of machine-built lenses and is genuinely one of the best. > It's a pity it can't even track my dog running towards me on the Alpha 100, but that's a failing of an entry-> level camera body (it does fine on an older 7 film body).
Click to expand...
Minolta film SLRs were renowned for their predictive autofocus, so
what happened when they went over to digital? - With much faster
processing shouldn't it work better? I'm just curious to try and
understand the reason for this.
Click to expand...
If you go back to the days of predictive AF, you go back to single central sensor operation (7000i and 8000i were the first models to claim predictive AF, as well as the Riva 105i 'brick'). Once multiple sensors and wide-area AF were introduced, the predictive focus claims disappeared from Minolta promotional blurbs and were not again used as a big selling point.

Have you seen any predictive focus claims for anything later than the Dynax 7, or even for that?

As far as I can tell, they went for multiple focus points instead, and the fastest focusing Dynax models - subjectively - were the 9xi, 600/700/800si and 7 for me. The 9 did not seem as fast. The si series (above 500 level) had very powerful focus motors, like the 7xi and 9xi, probably because of the big lithium cell power. Today's Min/Sony DSLRs seem to have less violent AF motors and less tendency to propel the lens into focus in a single sudden movement.

There must be two dozens things they can improve on the A100 to provide an ugrade which owners would buy into. A completely revised AF module would be a good start.

David
 
All more expensive pro lenses are still made in japan and are of the same high quality...however both canon and nikon are able to make outstanding 17-55 usm lenses for less money. I bet it is not better then the nikon 17-55, wich in turn is slightly better then canons lens. The price is too much.

Sony is doing some stupid things lately....also with ps3 and drm...

I would suspect such a lens makes sense on a pro quality body...

Prices have gone up in europe for ceratin pro lenses from nikon; for that price(1900-2000 euro's) i could get the 70-200vr...and the sb800.
 
If the prices even go up in europe...it's even worse...if the euro price is near the us price, say 2400 euro's then it is not that bad but 400 euro's extra is quite alot. If it were leitz lenses i could suspect their high prices...
 
David Kilpatrick said:
braeside said:
David Kilpatrick said:
The 70-200mm SSM is a hand-built lens in an age of machine-built lenses and is genuinely one of the best. > It's a pity it can't even track my dog running towards me on the Alpha 100, but that's a failing of an entry-> level camera body (it does fine on an older 7 film body).
Click to expand...
Minolta film SLRs were renowned for their predictive autofocus, so
what happened when they went over to digital? - With much faster
processing shouldn't it work better? I'm just curious to try and
understand the reason for this.
Click to expand...
If you go back to the days of predictive AF, you go back to single
central sensor operation (7000i and 8000i were the first models to
claim predictive AF, as well as the Riva 105i 'brick'). Once
multiple sensors and wide-area AF were introduced, the predictive
focus claims disappeared from Minolta promotional blurbs and were
not again used as a big selling point.

Have you seen any predictive focus claims for anything later than
the Dynax 7, or even for that?

As far as I can tell, they went for multiple focus points instead,
and the fastest focusing Dynax models - subjectively - were the
9xi, 600/700/800si and 7 for me. The 9 did not seem as fast. The si
series (above 500 level) had very powerful focus motors, like the
7xi and 9xi, probably because of the big lithium cell power.
Today's Min/Sony DSLRs seem to have less violent AF motors and less
tendency to propel the lens into focus in a single sudden movement.

There must be two dozens things they can improve on the A100 to
provide an ugrade which owners would buy into. A completely revised
AF module would be a good start.

David
Click to expand...
David,

I hate to disagree. But the the multi-focus point Minolta cameras do claim predictive focus. The Hove book on the 700si (4 sensors) has a long discussion on it, although it does say that selecting only one focus point disables multi-dimensional predictive focus. The specifications for the Maxxum/Dynax 7 film camera (9 points) also list multidimensional AF. Even the 7D guide book lists one of the selling points as predictive focus control (but they don't state 'multidimensional"?)

Minolta/KM/Sony should have stayed with the focus module for the Maxxum/Dynax 7 film camera with its dual cross (X+) center AF sensor. Although the X only worked with f/2.8 and faster lenses (as opposed to f/6.7 spec and f/8 actual for the others), I have found it to be much more accurate and fast than the other sensors, even when used with an f/2.8 lens). Since they released their inexpensive 28-70 'ish f/2.8 lens, it would have made an excellent combination. The film 7 module for all the sensors was much faster than the previous sensors (even the one in the 9) or subsequent ones.

But once Konica took over, they changed modules and released the Dynax 60. I believe they used the same module in the 7D, not sure about the A100, but I think so.

Tom
 
David Kilpatrick said:
Have you seen any predictive focus claims for anything later than the Dynax 7, or even for that?
Click to expand...
Yes,the Sony site says for the A100:

AUTO FOCUS SYSTEM

Type: (TTL) Phase-detection system
Sensor: CCD line sensors (9 points, 8 lines with centre cross-hair sensor)
Sensitivity Range: 0 EV – 18 EV (at ISO 100 equivalent)
Eye-Start AF System (On/Off Selectable)

AF Area: Wide Focus Area (Auto, 9 Areas); Spot; Local Focus Area Selection (9 Local Areas)
AF Modes: Continuous, Single, Automatic, DMF (Direct Manual Focus), Manual Focus
Predictive Focus Control (with moving subjects in AF-A and AF-C)
Focus Lock (with Shutter button or Spot AF button)

I agree however that the AF system does need an overhaul. (As does the flash system).

I was just curious what had changed from the earlier film models.

We live in hope that Sony will bring out some improvements soon.
--
David
 
tom said:
I hate to disagree. But the the multi-focus point Minolta cameras
do claim predictive focus. The Hove book on the 700si (4 sensors)
has a long discussion on it, although it does say that selecting
only one focus point disables multi-dimensional predictive focus.
The specifications for the Maxxum/Dynax 7 film camera (9 points)
also list multidimensional AF. Even the 7D guide book lists one of
the selling points as predictive focus control (but they don't
state 'multidimensional"?)
Click to expand...
I didn't say that disclaimed predictive focus - just that they never again made it the subject of a press conference, or issued examples, or made a big noise about it. Damian Dinning probably wrote the Hove book - can't remember, as that was after we stopped producing the books for Hove and Newpro took over the imprint, started using camera company sales staff to write the books. This meant that whatever was in the official Powerpoint stuff and sales technical training guides got into the books, but without qualification or adverse comment, so if the predictive focus was really something quite different in later models, Damian would never have drawn a comparison with earlier ones.

If the 7D has predictive focus, all it amounts to is the bare minimum - continuation of focus position adjustment to allow for shutter delay (moderated by the CPU program to adjust focus for each lens).

On topic for this forum, it was at this period that John Clements was asked to write the Nikon Hove books - he was at the time a Nikon staffer. He left to become a freelance writer and reviewer after two or three of these books were in print.

David
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top