who would use the A900

Oh god I am probably going to get flamed but I will ask it anyways. The A900 is suppost to be the professional photographers camera. With so few new lenses coming out, why would a person buy a camera for $2000-$3000 (per rumors). It seems like Canon and Nikon really have the "professional" camera with the lenses to support the photographer. I hope that Sony will see the need for more lenes....be gentle

I will not buy the A900. I'm afraid it's to expensive for me. And I think my A700 is a BIG camera, I can't think that the A900 will be smaller!

But will it be a good Camera? I'm sure it will! Will there be enough lenses for it in the future? I Bet Sony will come out with some very good glass and so will Tamron and Sigma for this baby! And don't forget, there is a lot of very good glass for sale by Sony (300 mm 2.8 G, 70-200 2.8 G, 70-300 G some very nice primes, a 100mm 2.8 macro and the beautifull Zeiss glass for Sony! It's not is there enough glass, the wuestion is, will the pro be seen with a Sony (even when it's better and cheaper then a Cannon or Nikon)? I do hope so!

8mycash said:

Oh god I am probably going to get flamed but I will ask it anyways.
The A900 is suppost to be the professional photographers camera. With
so few new lenses coming out, why would a person buy a camera for
$2000-$3000 (per rumors). It seems like Canon and Nikon really have
the "professional" camera with the lenses to support the
photographer. I hope that Sony will see the need for more lenes....be
gentle

Click to expand...

I think Sony is pretty much aware of where they are now and where they need to go in the future. They actually have been releasing a lot of product. I would guess it takes a large amount of effort/time to design a new lens - especially if it is to perform well on both FF and APS-C sensor. Aside from rebadging Tamron (which they do) I don't expect to see more than a few lenses (2-5) per year.

There is a decent amount of glass currently available for the A900 as I imagine most of the "G" lenses will be fine and all of the CZ lenses (except for the 16-80 which is APS-C only). I would expect that the new lenses being announced with the A900 would be usable as well.

--
fjbyrne

Sony itself has never called the body "Pro", but merely referred to it as the "Flagship".

Is there a specific lens you are looking for? The 16-35/2.8 is coming, there is the 24-70/2.8, the 70-200/2.8. What do you need to be "Pro"?

I will most likely be getting an A900 to upgrade from my D200. All I want for it is a wide angle (16-35mm?) and the 135mm f/1.8.

--

hotwire said:

Sony itself has never called the body "Pro", but merely referred to
it as the "Flagship".

Is there a specific lens you are looking for? The 16-35/2.8 is
coming, there is the 24-70/2.8, the 70-200/2.8. What do you need to
be "Pro"?

Click to expand...

Your correct, sony has never called the body "pro". I miss understood the "flagship" meaning.

Contrary to popular belief, there are more than one type of professional photographers.

Sports & News are more visible perhaps because they are always in the headline, however they count ONLY one portion of market segment.

Studios, commercial, landscape, nature .....

8mycash said:

Oh god I am probably going to get flamed but I will ask it anyways.
The A900 is suppost to be the professional photographers camera. With
so few new lenses coming out, why would a person buy a camera for
$2000-$3000 (per rumors). It seems like Canon and Nikon really have
the "professional" camera with the lenses to support the
photographer. I hope that Sony will see the need for more lenes....be
gentle

Click to expand...

--
http://jozphoto.com

Natural, the Way Photo Should Be

I have been waiting for an upgrade for my KM7D for years now. The A900 is just what I need and have been dreaming of (with a bit more MP though).. I have only FF glass since my minolta times - but am preparing to replacieold primes with new Zeiss zooms (16-35 & 24-70) and perhaps getting the 70-300G for the tele end. I have the money set aside - as I use the camera 50% for work and 50% for hobby the financial side is not a problem. (a MkIII or D3 would cost too much though).

-----------------------------------------------
Georg Peranen
http://koti.welho.com/wel00296/

A900 is too much for my needs. I'll wait for FF with less than 24mp. Say, 16-18mp would be fine.

My current temptation is 70-300 G to replace both rubbish KM 70-210/3.5-4.5 and good but heavy Tokina 100-300/4.

And smth in wide zoom department, like Sigma 12-24. After that I'll go for Zeiss fixes.

--

Sony Alpha 700, KM 5D, KM 20/2.8, KM 50/1.4, Tamron 90/2.8 macro, KM135/2.8, KM 28-75/2.8, KM 70-210/3.5-4.5, KM 18-70/3.5-5.6, Tokina 100-300/4, KM 5600HS, Kenko 1.5 Teleconvertor

I've been building up a high end lens collection (e.g. Zeiss 24-70, Sony 70-200) in anticipation of this camera. If the A900 is half of what I expect it to be, I'll get the 135mm STF.

Live is too short to drink cheap wine or shoot cheap lenses. LOL

Pros (advanced amateurs if that is better) who associate with advertising for store companies & department stores with their mall wall space & sidestore walls, & promotion on a department store entrance.

Shoots for department stores, mall walls, sidestore walls, promotion on the front of the mall complex.

So far, I've seen the 24-70 f2.8 Sonnar T* on the camera, so that would be the lens that would match match up to the FF Exmor, & the 16-35 lens should be outstanding on it.
--
Alex.

8mycash said:

The A900 is suppost to be the professional photographers camera. With
so few new lenses coming out, why would a person buy a camera for
$2000-$3000 (per rumors).

Click to expand...

I think the 28~75 f2.8; 85 f1.4; 100 f2.8 Soft focus; both macros and 50 1.7 will work PERFECTLY on the Flagship.

I will have to test the 35~200 xi, 20 2.8; 17~35 f2.8-4 and 70~210 f4 and see if those can resolve the new sensor. I know the 24~105 f3.5-4.5 won't...

--
Pako Dominguez
-----------------------
http://www.phototeka.net

8mycash said:

Oh god I am probably going to get flamed but I will ask it anyways.
The A900 is suppost to be the professional photographers camera. With
so few new lenses coming out, why would a person buy a camera for
$2000-$3000 (per rumors). It seems like Canon and Nikon really have
the "professional" camera with the lenses to support the
photographer. I hope that Sony will see the need for more lenes....be
gentle

Click to expand...

--

Whether flagship or pro, I think the need for lens selection can be overstated. I do agree that for a 35mm camera "system" to do well in the pro market(which for better or worse most equate pro with sports/nature pro,) a plethora of lenses and accessories is expected, but I don't think a lot of shooters need it. When I invested in DSLR, after shooting medium format, I was so hypnotized by the lens selection that I ended up with more lenses than I actually used. I had no problem with only using a 150mm, 80mm, and 50mm on Hasselblad, so I'm not sure why I thought I needed every possible focal length with 35mm! The 35mm equivalent of those three Hassie lenses end up being more than covered by my CZ 24-70 and CZ 85mm, so why did I buy more than that? Gear lust!

I am currently prepping to sell around 10 lenses, leaving only my CZ 24-70 and CZ 85 for the A900, because, as a studio shooter, I don't need more than that, and I know plenty of pro studio shooters that I see rarely switch a lens. Honestly, for me, too many lens options can water down my creativity a bit, and the 24-70 zoom range spoils me enough

With the upcoming zooms and primes, Sony will have a pretty good selection, and I'll have to try not to be tempted by them as well. lol.

--
Neil Vanderwolf
http://thewarmland.com

8mycash said:

Oh god I am probably going to get flamed but I will ask it anyways.
The A900 is suppost to be the professional photographers camera. With
so few new lenses coming out, why would a person buy a camera for
$2000-$3000 (per rumors). It seems like Canon and Nikon really have
the "professional" camera with the lenses to support the
photographer. I hope that Sony will see the need for more lenes....be
gentle

Click to expand...

Hmmm, I'll have to raid the piggybank and buy myself a ZA 24-70mm/2.8 SSM, 70-200mm/2.8 SSM G or its successor, hopefully a ZA 16-35mm/2.8,and ZA 135mm/1.8 for starters . Since I don't do birding, wildlife, sports or paparazzi stuff, I won't be needing anything longer.

As for my existing lenses, I'd be happy to see how the 20mm/2.8, 35mm/2, 50mm/2.8 Macro, 100mm/2, 100mm/2.8 Macro, and STF 135mm would fare on the flagship.

My wishlist would include a ZA 50mm/1.4 (I'm not entirely happy with my copy), reintroduction of the 28mm/2, 35mm/2, 50mm/1.7, 100mm/2, 300mm/4, and 400mm/4.5, a circular fisheye ( 8mm), and possibly a 200mm/4 macro.

The only problem with Sony releasing more lenses is that I'll end up bankrupt .

Cheers,
Daniel.

Any camera which shakes up the market by moving the price point from $8000 to even $4000 is a huge deal! At 3K there will be many takers! You can image cameras being discounted more than 60%!!!!

With these pixel densities FF we can do many things.
1. Crop till you drop
2. Downsample to gain ISO performance equal to low resolution cameras.
3. Stabilized lenses!

For everyone who wants to print big prints it would be something that was not affordable before. Much cheaper than either Canon flagship (1DsM3) or the digital backs, and more versatile. Could not ask for more.

Oh and the lenses:

16-35CZ, 24-70 CZ, 70-200 cover the most popular ranges. Or you could go prime route 35 1.4 (IIRC Nikon doesnt have this one), 50 1.4 85 1.4 135 1.8. You can use it with a back up A700 then your prime ranges are 52 1.4, 75 1.5, 127 f1.4, and 202 f1.8!, and it will be only 1 stop noisier than D3

Not bad at all

Cheers,

N

... I'll wait a year till price of A900 has dropped, but I surely want to buy that camera (now I have 7D). Loss of crop factor will be compensated by more pixels, but:

1) What is the added value?

2) Will my Minolta lenses also do on the A900?

• Sigma 12-24
• Minolta 28-135/4-4.5
• Minolta 100/2.8 macro
• Minolta 80-200/2.8 HS APO G
• Minolta 500/8 (AF)

--
Regards, Mario.
http://www.mario.zenfolio.com

The more interesting question is who actually does need the camera?

Not think they need, but actually shoots anything that requires FF? Very few indeed. Maybe some who's work requires super wide angle, but I think that the problems of getting frame coverage from super wide angle are going to limit the difference more than people realize.

But who will buy it? Lots of folks that think by buying a higher end camera that they will suddenly become expert photographers shooting nothing but award winning shots. When the truth is that they will shoot just as poorly or just as well as they do now. Or would with a APS camera with the exact same feature set.

There are also the folks who think they will somehow return to regular 35mm film shooting by going with this digital camera. Again, not going to happen, it's a digital camera, you have to drop your film habits and learn digital.

People with more money than sense will buy it, just to show off they have the money. An ego thing. People who would be better of with a cheap p&s considering what photography they do.

Walt

I will buy a couple, and I'm not interested in new lenses. Everything I have is old full frame glass and I am content to continue to buy used- especially as long as Sony keeps charging so much for glass and also continues to put out slow lenses.

2.8 continuous or wider or I'm not interested.

"Say, 16-18mp would be fine" A700 got 12MP but size of image can be changed to Small - 3MP, Medium - 6.4MP and Large - 12MP so I am sure A900 got something like this, don't you think?

DaddyBit said:

A900 is too much for my needs. I'll wait for FF with less than 24mp.
Say, 16-18mp would be fine.

My current temptation is 70-300 G to replace both rubbish KM
70-210/3.5-4.5 and good but heavy Tokina 100-300/4.
And smth in wide zoom department, like Sigma 12-24. After that I'll
go for Zeiss fixes.

--
Sony Alpha 700, KM 5D, KM 20/2.8, KM 50/1.4, Tamron 90/2.8 macro,
KM135/2.8, KM 28-75/2.8, KM 70-210/3.5-4.5, KM 18-70/3.5-5.6, Tokina
100-300/4, KM 5600HS, Kenko 1.5 Teleconvertor

Click to expand...

--
My 2007 Sony Alpha Showcase
http://www.bercasio.com/photos/2007/Showcase/

'It is between me, my Alpha and the world out there. It is quite therapeutic.'
'Quality than quantity.'