Reading mode: Light Dark

False Rumor

Go to last post
N

NorthwestF

Senior Member
Messages
1,040
Reaction score
17
Location
US
Sony Alpha division has invested millions of $ on FF lenses for the last two years

CZ 24-70 F2.8
CZ 16-35 F2.8
CZ 85mm F1.4
CZ 135mm F1.8
70-200G
70-300G
70-400G

And tomorrow we can add

CZ 24mm F2.0
500mm F/4

None of these lenses make any sense if there is no FF camera. Sure these lenses would work on APSC sensor, but why make them FF (larger, more expensive) if they are only to be used on APSC? Why not make them DT (cheaper to build, smaller?) like Pentax did?

If Sony semiconductor division stops building FF sensors, the Alpha division would need buy FF sensor from Kodak or somewhere else.

There is no way after investing millions for two years on lenses can the alpha division now stop building FF cameras. They would just need to buy a sensor from somewhere else if the rumor is true.

.
 
NorthwestF said:
There is no way after investing millions for two years on lenses can the alpha division now stop building FF cameras. They would just need to buy a sensor from somewhere else if the rumor is true.
Click to expand...
Why would they continue investing millions into something that isn't providing them with an adequate ROI?
 
Philip Goh said:
Philip Goh said:
There is no way after investing millions for two years on lenses can the alpha division now stop building FF cameras. They would just need to buy a sensor from somewhere else if the rumor is true.
Click to expand...
Why would they continue investing millions into something that isn't providing them with an adequate ROI?
Click to expand...
Because it's way to soon to give up? They only released one camera A900 (A850 is the same camera with a different name) with no live view, no video, no class leading jpeg/high ISO. First they need to introduce a quality camera and then see if there is ROI for it or not.

It's way to early and I am skeptical about the whole rumor.

Tomorrow Sony will release a bunch of new FF lenses.
 
The 24mm and 500mm are both definitely usable with APS-C. I imagine the 500mm to be more desirable to an APS-C shooter than FF shooter. Of all the lenses listed, only the 135mm strikes me as one that might be an odd match for APS-C.

These lenses may have been in the pipeline long before there was a consensus on FF bodies at Sony.
--
My flickr page
http://www.flickr.com/photos/33412421@N08/
 
ovlov said:
The 24mm and 500mm are both definitely usable with APS-C. I imagine the 500mm to be more desirable to an APS-C shooter than FF shooter.
Click to expand...
They are all usable also on a cell phone size sensor. So what? Why build them with FF image circle? They would be a lot cheaper, smaller, lighter with APSC size image circle.

The OP is correct. These are FF lenses, and these make zero sense without FF camera. All medium format lenses would work on APSC (as they would work on a cell phone size sensor too). You can also build a Hubble telescope size lens that will work on APSC. The point is all these are FF lenses, are they are unnecessarily expensive and large for APSC. They are indeed almost useless without a FF camera.

All these lenses must be redesigned (made smaller, cheaper) if there is no FF camera that can use them (if the rumor is true, which is doubtful anyway).
 
For instance, he predicted that Sony's mirroless camera was going to be larger than the GF1, and that happened. Didn't it?

See, Thom is infallible!

chad
 
zepzr said:
... it's way to soon to give up? They only released one camera A900 (A850 is the same camera with a different name) with no live view, no video, no class leading jpeg/high ISO.
Click to expand...
If Nikon drew the plug on Sony's economy of FF sensors by turning elsewhere, then the DSLR division will subsequently suffer from this. No matter how much they invested in designing FF lenses.

I am sure, Sony believed they could keep Nikon as a customer for new generations of FF sensors - but if this is not so, it would be very difficult for Sony's semiconductor division to justify manufacturing FF sensors without Nikon.

A decision in one Sony division might affect another division. And Sony's DSLR division is much smaller than the semiconductor devision - so the smaller diviision will never be able to decide for the larger division.
--
-----------------------
Documensony
'Spontaneity is enabled by rigorous practice'
 
ovlov said:
... the 135mm strikes me as one that might be an odd match for APS-C.
Click to expand...
What was ever odd about a 200mm eq. lens, even 1.8?

--
-----------------------
Documensony
'Spontaneity is enabled by rigorous practice'
 
right, he is!

so, start selling your stuff and go to the future: Nex

the earlier one start selling the better the price

same as with minolta lenses until....... there came a player on the market that made it possible to use them again.

So, we wait and see who takes over the high end sector then.
 
You don't post a lot on the Sony DSLR forum, so what's this?

Are you trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy?

How long is it since Sony last announced an expert level APS-C body? Let's see ... according to DPR: A700 - Announced 06-Sep-07.

That's almost three years. The A700 has long since been discontinued, and everybody expects a successor very soon ("or Sony will be doomed").

The A900 may have been discontinued, and no successor announced (nor has there of the A700), but to conclude from that to Sony leaving the full frame market is not only stretching it quite a bit, but also shows that you have a hidden agenda, troll.
 
I read from this that the OP was suggesting they would continue with FF sensors based on the investment in lenses, or have I read it incorrectly?
 
These lenses may be committed by contract. Cancelling a contract can be very expensive for either party. Cheaper to make the lens.
 
Sony buying sensors from another source? If filming the ad for the new Panasonic(?) using, in part, the Canon EOS 5D Mk II was a bad move, what do you suppose Sony would think of having a non-Sony sensor in their SLRs?

Why would Sony stop producing full frame sensors?

I think it's in the title to the OP: False rumour.

(and that's one type of trolling)
 
Sorry I just do not get your point.

The OP has stated that he believes the rumours are false, regarding stopping FF development, based on the support for full frame lenses.

How does this make him a troll?

What is your point exactly?
 
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