Reasonable expectations for the next year

Among some of the privileges of working in a photo store chain are attending seminars and handling of the newest cameras prior to them being available for sale.

Starting from the latter, we received the D300 on Monday and D3 just today. I just need to handle the E-3 and EOS 40D now, as I know both D300 and (gasp!) D3 fit poorly in my hands. They (and especially D3) give some hints as to what can be expected from Sony next year.

Back in October I attended a seminar by Sony reps and they had two A700s to play with along with some lenses. We had it on sale within a week, and are just phasing in the A700P kit which I was able to play with almost two months ago. More importantly, it's an excellent occasion to talk to the reps. They were tight-lipped, as could be expected due to their recent slip-up. And no, I'm not joking, they didn't so much as drop a hint on the upcoming cameras aside from one thing: that in one year's time, there'd be 5 Sony alpha cameras on sale. Asking about the A900 received just a smirk, but I feel asking about A200, A300, A400, A500, A600 or A800 would receive just as much. So I didn't bother dwelling on the subject.

--- Cameras ---

Five cameras is a lot. That speaks a lot about Sony's future strategy. They aren't withdrawing as some have feared, they are mounting an offensive right now. What we can assume as true for the time being are that the following two cameras are slated for release in 2008:
A900
A500

Along with the A700, they comprise three of the expected five cameras on the market. Sony wants to sell 700,000 DSLRs in 2008, and assuming they launch A500 in the first quarter (easy), and market it aggressively in the Summer and Christmas, they can reach that mark with ease.

While that means they don't need a stripped-down camera, it might be forthcoming. Since 700,000 units is achievable with one model only (A500), adding more than one model below that one is prodigious.

Let's say Sony want to be prodigious and release A300 and A400 as lower models. That would pretty much put an end to all other predictions (A400 -- someting at the level of EOS 400D, A300 -- a new level below all DSLRs -- what Minolta did with their 3-level cameras -- a compact in the skin of an SLR), but I guess they won't do it.

My prediction for 2008 are as follows:

A400 or A500 (not sure about the name, either are possible, but I expect features to be cut down compared to A100, 12 megapixels likely)
A600 (on par with Nikon D80 -- slightly cut down A700)
A700
A900
the mystery camera

You can understand why I'm eager to call the amateur camera A400. There's not going to be enough features in it to be called A500, which should be a successor to the A100. A600 would sit in the slot above A100, so there'd be no 5-level camera for now.

As for the mystery camera: it can either be:

1. A500 -- upgraded A100, can't think of things to be added apart from LiveView. Minolta 5D was, in many ways, more powerful than 7D, which is best seen in playback speed and RAW magnification, adding LiveView, even without a firmware update for the A700 is certainly possible.

2. A300. In that case, A500 is easily possible instead of A400. A300 would be a LiveView DSLR (along with an optical viewfinder), lighter than anything else in the market and cheaper than Nikon D40, likely below $500 mark for a kit.

3. A707. Advanced Amateur EVF camera. No mirror, no optical viewfinder. EVF the same as in Minolta A2. The rationale for that camera is that it would function alongside the A700, not replace it. Perhaps a special lens or two that would fit the mount, but be much deeper (no possibility of mounting it on alpha mount DSLRs).

As for A900, I can say with full certainty that it's not going to beat Nikon D3, except in price and some features (SSS springs to mind). Sony follows the spirit of Minolta and make their DSLRs smaller and lighter than the competition. A900 will thus probably be the first pro DSLR with optional vertical grip (perhaps a standard accessory). Hopefully realized as it was in film 9 and 7 bodies, so that three batteries would fit (one in the camera, two in the grip or one in the camera and one heavy duty in the grip).

It's certainly going to be full frame (same as in D3), up to some 8 fps (slower than D3, maaaybe equal to), two card slots (CF and MS Pro-HG), AF illuminator, live view, SSS, 1/12,000th shutter (basically a must, if not for high speed, then for high X-sync to allow SSS to work).

I realize I practically repeat what others have already said on the topic of the new camera, but that's it.

One thing, though: don't expect miracles. Nikon didn't fit all your wishes into D3, Sony won't, either, into A900.

I'm going to be brief here and post basic lens data and a short rationale for each:

1. Zeiss 17-35/2.8 SSM, maybe a bit shorter. Zeiss already did that in Contax N mount (the focal length range and ultrasonic motor). If shorter, then unlikely to go all the way down to 14 mm, 15 or 16 mm is more likely. 17-35/3.5 was already done by Minolta as a G lens, this one is going to be a Zeiss, if only because they have to one-up the legacy.

2. Zeiss 24-70/2.8 SSM. Already speculated, found very likely by photoclubalpha. I think it's an essential to go with a full frame body along with the wide angle zoom and 70-200G.
3. Zeiss 200/2 SSM. Possible? Just maybe.
4. Sony 200/2.8 G SSM. A redo of a Minolta lens.
5. Sony 300/4 G SSM. A redo.
6. Sony 400/4.5 G SSM. Another redo.
7. Sony 600/4 G SSM. And one more.

8. 14/2.8. Possible only if their wide angle zoom goes down only to 16. If it goes down to 14-15, then maybe a 12/2.8 (extremely difficult to make).
9. 24/2.8? 28/2? 50/1.7???

Overall, I find 1 and 2 both obvious and essential. I can see number 2 in the table on Michael Hohner's site, when was it announced? Given their speed fetish, number 3 is a remote possibility. Numbers 4-7 also seem obvious as that requires them only to recall, rework and recalibrate the lenses in question. Number 8 is possible only as something wider than the wide angle zoom. There's no point in releasing a 14 mm lens if you have a 14-24/2.8 zoom of high quality (as Nikon has, for example). Lenses in number 9 are certainly possible, but likely only if Sony is shaping up nicely, as they require free manufacturing capacity.

Just wild speculation, I think we will see a new pro flash, in the ballpark of 60 m GN. GN war makes as much sense as MP war, but it's possible with the current HVL-F56AM to go up to 60 m if zoomed up to 105 mm (it's more powerful at 35 and 50 mm than Canon's 580 EX). An update is on order to compete with Canon and their vastly improved 580 EX II.

Another thing to expect is the long-awaited update to the HVL-F36AM. It should go up to some 42 or 44 m GN, and have a navigation display added.

One thing that might be unexpected is a "new" flash, slightly less powerful version of the F36, with maybe 30 m max GN, and same controls as F36 (read: few).

toughluck said:

Just wild speculation, I think we will see a new pro flash, in the
ballpark of 60 m GN. GN war makes as much sense as MP war, but it's
possible with the current HVL-F56AM to go up to 60 m if zoomed up to
105 mm (it's more powerful at 35 and 50 mm than Canon's 580 EX). An
update is on order to compete with Canon and their vastly improved
580 EX II.

Another thing to expect is the long-awaited update to the HVL-F36AM.
It should go up to some 42 or 44 m GN, and have a navigation display
added.

One thing that might be unexpected is a "new" flash, slightly less
powerful version of the F36, with maybe 30 m max GN, and same
controls as F36 (read: few).

Click to expand...

Oh if that FLASH option were TRULY availabe... They already had this with the 5400 flash going up to 105!!! I have two of these bad boys for my FILM camera and was serverly disappointed when it didn't work with the A100... Maybe the "new" flash is a re-badge of the the 5400??!

That would be great!

Thanks for the new "rumors", here's hoping that your "rumors" turns out to be FACT, especially about the FF!!!

--
-Alex

From the minds of Minolta to the imagination of Sony, Alpha, like no other.

http://www.pbase.com/lonewolf69

toughluck said:

4. Sony 200/2.8 G SSM. A redo of a Minolta lens.
5. Sony 300/4 G SSM. A redo.
6. Sony 400/4.5 G SSM. Another redo.

Click to expand...

I'd like to see the above, but I will hate to see the price. :-(

Darrin
--
ださかわ

You have to ask yourself...'what would John Smeaton do?'

No Macro Flash?

Walt

I suppose they would love to introduce a whole host of new flashes and accessories.

For starters, a wireless flash controller. A900 (or whatever it will be called) doesn't have built-in flash, the same was true with Minolta 9xi, and they had an infrared controller for that one.

They would have to introduce a whole new line of flashes to allow full control of independent groups and ratios. Old protocol is getting long in the tooth as it relied on having TTL-OTF to work.

So I guess there are going to be macro flashes as well. For starters, Sony might want to equal what Nikon did and introduce a wireless-controlled macro flash.

Secondly, Minolta never had a proper macro ring flash. They had one with four independent flash bulbs, now they have one that uses LEDs for illumination. No ring flash, though.

So there's room for a new ring flash, likely a new infrared controller, maybe a wireless macro flash.

And I stand by my previous three models: F60, F40 and F30. F60 as a new high-end flash, with dot-matrix display, F40 -- weaker, with the same controls as the 5400HS (or current F56), and F30 with the same controls as F36, but weaker still. All should be able to do HSS and WL. Minolta had a low-end flash (2500(D)), but it didn't have WL, it couldn't do HSS, and only had controls for turning on and off, and choosing between P-TTL and ADI.

I would be amazed if they could do that.

I expect the A100 replacement, and the flagship.

I wonder how they will fit other models in, bar maybe a superbudget K110D or D40, priced under the new A100.

The segment between the new A100 and A700 is a tricky one..it could be done, but it will have to have a careful price, too low, and it will hurt the new A100, too high, and people will just buy the A700.

Its only really nikon who have attacked that area..or maybe pentax with their K10D (with its reduced price)

Lenses, well..only to say that sony must look at their prices all across the board, as they are not competitive, or attractive to new buyers.

The low and mid range need fleshing out a lot more too. A 50mm f1.7 is utterly essential, as is a 70-200mm f4, and f4 long tele primes, affordable alternatives to the crazy priced f2.8 ones.

Sony should avoid bringing out too many APS only lenses..in five years..FF may be in a strong position.

I hope sony are learing some of the lessons in the marketplace, because even with 5 cameras, unless they sort their pricing out (esp in europe), they will not be in a position to attack the top two players..

2008 is a critical time for sony all over. Because they have had long enough to sort out any KM inherited issues..and enough time to decide on a strategy. Their biggest challenge is to pull in the new buyers, or encourage switchers. Something to date, they have not really had much impact on.
--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

Barry Fitzgerald said:

I would be amazed if they could do that.

Click to expand...

Me too. Hence the conjecture that there can be an EVF camera in the works.

Member said:

I expect the A100 replacement, and the flagship.

Click to expand...

Quite obvious.

Member said:

I wonder how they will fit other models in, bar maybe a superbudget
K110D or D40, priced under the new A100.

Click to expand...

That's possible. I tend to view Sony as a continuation of Minolta rather than a new outfit.

Member said:

The segment between the new A100 and A700 is a tricky one..it could
be done, but it will have to have a careful price, too low, and it
will hurt the new A100, too high, and people will just buy the A700.

Click to expand...

Four cameras is easy. A300, A500, A700 and A900. Five? Tricky to say the least. There are two possible lines:

A300, A400, A600, A700 and A900. As we can see, having two cameras with very little differentiation is pointless (Pentax K100D and K110D). Ten and twelve megapixel sensors do not a difference make. Eye start did in the film era (4 v. 5 level), not really in digital. Dropping SSS? Would be an extremely stupid move on part of Sony.

However, A300 with a 10 megapixel sensor, SSS, 2.5" LCD, all packed into a small body (the size of the film 5?) and A400 as an upgraded A100 with 12 megapixel sensor (keeping the 2.5" LCD) do make a difference. A600 would be easy then. 12 megapixels, two dials, A700's viewfinder, LCD a bit smaller than 3", but high resolution.

Or, as mentioned, A300, A500, A700, A900 and, let's call it that, R700. EVIL camera in A700 body. Completely niche, would find a buyer or two, at best.

Regardless of the many posts on these, and many other, forums, few people would muster the courage to get a completely electronic camera, sans mirror and optical VF.

[snip]

Member said:

Lenses, well..only to say that sony must look at their prices all
across the board, as they are not competitive, or attractive to new
buyers.

The low and mid range need fleshing out a lot more too. A 50mm f1.7
is utterly essential, as is a 70-200mm f4, and f4 long tele primes,
affordable alternatives to the crazy priced f2.8 ones.

Click to expand...

Seems that way, but... Nikon doesn't have them and does quite well on the market. However, while a revised beercan would seem logical, it's not. It uses old glass, and I think it would be easier to reformulate it rather than reviving the old design. BTW, if you want affordable, look no further than Sigma.

50/1.7 is long overdue, as are 35/2, 28/2 and 24/2.8. An 85/1.7 would be a nice addition back in the film era, I wonder about its usefulness now -- if anyone will be able to afford the A900, I doubt they wouldn't be able to afford the Zeiss 85.

I would still love Sony to develop an STF 85/1.4 [T/2.4 or thereabouts] and STF 50/1.4 [same as above] if only because I find the 135 STF to be too long (I long after STF's creamy look).

Member said:

Sony should avoid bringing out too many APS only lenses..in five
years..FF may be in a strong position.

Click to expand...

Not in the amateur market, unless some revolution in chip making is on the horizon. I'm sure all companies would find usefulness in bringing all their camera lines back together and selling APS cameras as small and affordable alternative (like Minolta did with their Vectis system, sans affordable).

Member said:

2008 is a critical time for sony all over. Because they have had long
enough to sort out any KM inherited issues..

Click to expand...

I find Sony to be a continuation of Minolta rather than something completely new. A100 was an excellent testbed for new technologies (new metering, improved AF, as examples), A700 sorted out early digital issues the engineers weren't able to solve when working for Minolta. Most of the issues are a thing of the past, come A700. It's time for new features.

Member said:

and enough time to decide
on a strategy. Their biggest challenge is to pull in the new buyers,
or encourage switchers. Something to date, they have not really had
much impact on.

Click to expand...

They have very loyal customers to their Cybershot line and some are willing to upgrade. As much as R-1 was a nice camera, they wouldn't get a Sony A-R-1, maybe some of them would, but not enough to recoup the cost. Evolution rather than revolution.

Oh, and I still stand by my theory that they will be merging their XDCAM and alpha systems in the future, incorporating large sensors into professional camcorders and cinema motion cameras.

Barry Fitzgerald said:

The low and mid range need fleshing out a lot more too. A 50mm f1.7
is utterly essential, as is a 70-200mm f4, and f4 long tele primes,
affordable alternatives to the crazy priced f2.8 ones.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure how essential some of those are from a marketing standpoint, but my personal feelings certainly lie in that direction. I recently sold my Minolta 200m f/2.8 because it's heavy when mounted on my a9. It took brilliant pictures and I'll miss it, but I'd much rather have a compact 200mm f/4.

What I really want: Magnesium-bodied 85mm f/1.8 (or even 2.0), 135mm f/2.8, and 200mm f/4, all very compact. I'd like to be able to fit two bodies and five lenses (the three above plus a 50mm and a 28mm) in a small camera bag that I can carry around without damaging my spine.

toughluck said:

Regardless of the many posts on these, and many other, forums, few
people would muster the courage to get a completely electronic
camera, sans mirror and optical VF.

Click to expand...

Of course, I can't speak for anyone else, but for me if the EVF body was at the low end (say no more than $500) and was well done and made good use of the certain advantages that an EVF has then I would get it to supplement an OVF DSLR.

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

Henry Richardson said:

Of course, I can't speak for anyone else, but for me if the EVF
body was at the low end (say no more than $500) and was well done and
made good use of the certain advantages that an EVF has then I would
get it to supplement an OVF DSLR.

Click to expand...

Now would you be looking for a "video mode" serious question here ;-)

--



Clint is on holiday! Soon to return! ;-)

Barry Fitzgerald said:

Now would you be looking for a "video mode" serious question here ;-)

Click to expand...

No, but if it had it then who cares?

--
Henry Richardson
http://www.bakubo.com

toughluck said:

I suppose they would love to introduce a whole host of new flashes
and accessories.

For starters, a wireless flash controller. A900 (or whatever it will
be called) doesn't have built-in flash, the same was true with
Minolta 9xi, and they had an infrared controller for that one.

Click to expand...

That is not connected with macro flashes at all. They are not used at a distance.

toughluck said:

They would have to introduce a whole new line of flashes to allow
full control of independent groups and ratios. Old protocol is
getting long in the tooth as it relied on having TTL-OTF to work.

Click to expand...

And just where is the new one going to get it's exposure measurements. OTF went away in Minolta with the 7D, which did not do OTF. The substitute has been preflash read by the regular exposure sensors. It's quite obvious that's not as good, Minolta, Canon, Nikon all went worse when it switched to that.

toughluck said:

So I guess there are going to be macro flashes as well. For starters,
Sony might want to equal what Nikon did and introduce a
wireless-controlled macro flash.

Click to expand...

Wireless or not is not the issue, exposure control is.

toughluck said:

Secondly, Minolta never had a proper macro ring flash. They had one
with four independent flash bulbs, now they have one that uses LEDs
for illumination. No ring flash, though.

Click to expand...

That's because Minolta's macro ring flash (that's what it was called) was an advance over the single 360 degree flashtube. Allowed control of flash direction. Canon and Nikon imitated, but with only two sections. You are arguing semantics.

Minolta produced the ring flash all the way to the end. In fact I bought another ring direct from then after they announced closing. Sony, on the other hand never had a macro ring flash. They tried to substitute a led ring for the flash and virtually no one who did macro bought it.

toughluck said:

So there's room for a new ring flash, likely a new infrared
controller, maybe a wireless macro flash.

Click to expand...

The bottom line is that it has to do accurate exposure control with distances down to less than 10mm. That's what we have now, though the OTF version was much better at it than the current preflash version. The OTF version could control flash duration down to 1/56000 of a second. The preflash is not that good in comparison.

Forget wireless with macro, that's almost trivia.

The bottom line from what you are saying is that macro folks should give up on Sony producing macro flashes. Or maybe it's just that you understand macro so poorly you did not find out. Macro is a fairly good chunk of photography to be so disorganized over it.

Walt

5 body line is not very hard.

A900 (FF , bla bla bla)
A700
A500 (coming soon, takes on the D80, K10D type cameras)

That's the easy part.

Now how much sony puts into the A500 will control what an A300 is. Clearly an A300 will go against the D40X and K100D replacements. But it comes down to a question of is it a SLR or not.

If the A300 is a traditional SLR, then there could be an A200 or A400 (or even a different name completely, but not likely) that is an EVIL. That gets you 5 cameras.

If the A300 is an EVIL, then we are off looking for #5.

Any EVIL from sony I expect to be a small box with an A mount on the front, uses A mount lenses, but some new lenses are also made just for it. Including a re-packaged lens based on the R1 lens.

So with an EVIL A300 what would a fifth camera be?

My guess would be an A800. Most likely that would be a High Speed body like the D3 or 1DIII. Probably crop sensor. Or it could be a FF body but with cost savings over the A900 (smaller view finder, cheaper body).

Still, a 5th body sounds like a bit of a stretch right now. Maybe they mean by then there will have been 5 Alpha bodies so they are counting the A100. Maybe there will be a replacement for the A700 by the end of 08. Or maybe they are going to do something I would love and offer special versions of some bodies. Like a B&W only version of an A700.

Right now it's clear that 08 has 2 cheaper bodies coming, and the A900. That is a lot of work for them as is.

And in time they could get to 5 bodies sure. Between EVILs, SLRs of all prices, Big time Pro body, a High Speed body and so forth. Also they could go to special versions or bodies B&W, IR, Ultra lightweight, Super Rugged, etc. But sounds like a bit much for one year.

On lenses, sure plenty Sony could bring. But we should be seeing a Wide Zoom and the 2.8/24-70G SSM soon enough. Those are big needs for them.

Assuming we get the PMA lenses at some point, that means we will see

2.8/17-35G (best guess from description, could be a 4/12-24DT G)
2.8/24-70G (known lens to be coming for a long time)
2.8/400G (mockup leaves little to the imagination)

4/200 G macro (I know DK doesn't agree, but the dimensions match and the Minolta is missing)

80-400 (this comes from what DK has said before, just a guess, could be the rumored 70-200 replacement it true, could be a 4/70-200)

Then the ZA primes. My guesses
sub 20mm that is fast, maybe a 2.8/14
2.8 or 2.0/25mm

And of course the 70-300G has been announced officially.

That plugs a lot of holes. The still need a new cheaper 2.8/24-75 zoom to replace the old Tammy based one. A rebadged 2.8/17-50 would do them good. The 4.5/400G needs to return with SSM, and the 4/600G needs to return with SSM. DK has mentioned both of these as having been in the works by KM before the Sony deal.

Oh yeah, and the most critical lens, a sub 24mm TS.

seth hosler said:

What I really want: Magnesium-bodied 85mm f/1.8 (or even 2.0), 135mm
f/2.8, and 200mm f/4, all very compact. I'd like to be able to fit
two bodies and five lenses (the three above plus a 50mm and a 28mm)
in a small camera bag that I can carry around without damaging my
spine.

Click to expand...

This is why the business of adding a motor to each lens is so dumb. Make the lenses bigger and heavier, add SSM.

To get small, light lenses I'd even be happy to have straight MF lenses. Not likely to happen, however.

I can handle heavy lenses, but just as soon have small, light high quality ones.

Walt

All interesting ideas, but Sony needs 5 bodies in one fell swoop like they need a hole in the head. What better way to CONFUSE someone out of buying a camera, rather than enticing someone. Info overload at the sales counter. "Well, maybe I'll just get this Nikon that my friend already owns" ;-)

Lenses, yes. Bodies no.

Three is all they need now. A high end FF to hold that end of the market, and a low end to suck in the newcomers.

707? Replace the 700? Huh? Why?

Replacing the A-100 is a tougher call. Maybe an A-101 needs to come out to fix its flaws. But I'd almost rather them just let that market divide itself between the lower end model and the A-700 as it comes down below $1000.

Greg

toughluck said:

Five cameras is a lot. That speaks a lot about Sony's future
strategy. They aren't withdrawing as some have feared, they are
mounting an offensive right now. What we can assume as true for the
time being are that the following two cameras are slated for release
in 2008:

Click to expand...

I think it is pretty much a certainty that Sony will be selling at least four DSLR's a year from now. They are:
1) The A700
2) The professional camera
3) A new upgrade of the A100

4) A lower priced camera that would compete in the slot that currently includes the D40x and the Canon 350D. The Sony camera could be a new one or it could still be the A100. I had been leaning toward the expectation that Sony would follow Canon's pattern and just keep its old low end model around for a second product cycle at a lower price. But there do seem to have some indications that Sony is planning to follow the Nikon pattern with a separate low end line.

As far as a fifth model goes, I will believe it when I see it. Reps generally do not know product plans until a company is ready for them to promote the product. When that happens, the plans rapidly become generally known.

--
David Jacobson
http://www.pbase.com/dnjake

For "Live View". Just $200 more than the original a700. Then everyone would be happy....Right?
--
Glassman

I know I'm in the minority but I don't really care about live view. i have a 5mp Olympus i bought while waiting for Minolta to put out their first DSLR. It has live view but the only time I use it is when I use the camera in video mode. I really have no use for live view.

I'd like to see more effort put into a more reliable flash system or get rid of the proprietary hot shoe.