Sales of the Sony A99

Started Oct 30, 2012 | Discussions thread
jonikon Veteran Member • Posts: 7,072
Re: Frank Doorhof on the Sony A99

VirtualMirage wrote:

jonikon wrote:

Also the a99 is not a professional level camera. The a99s auto focus and viewfinder were borrowed from the a77 APS-C camera, and the body is not all metal (like the D800), but plastic at the critical lens mount area, (much like the D600). Nor is there a professional support system for the a99 like Nikon and Canon provide to professionals. Nice FF camera, maybe. Pro body, no.

- Jon

What's your point exactly?

The D800 and D4 use the same AF sensor. Would you want to knock the D4 down a few notches and feel it is way overpriced because it is using the same AF sensor as a camera that is half its cost? If the AF works well, it works well. No need to fix what isn't broken. Also, whose to say they didn't tweak the AF sensor since its initial inception in the A77? And don't forget that it is coupled with the on sensor AF assist points.

We can also say the same about the viewfinder. The D4 and D800 use the same viewfinder. What makes that any different than the A77 and A99? Both offer great viewfinders for their field, just so happens one is OVF in the Nikon realm and the Sony is EVF. But each brand is sharing the same part with a lesser or more expensive sibling. It just so happens that while the A99 is only $1400 more expensive than the A77 while the D4 is $3000 more than the D800.

Your analogy is not valid. Both the D800 and D4 are professional grade full frame cameras and don't use the viewfinder, AF sensors, or body build of any of their APS-C DSLRs, like the a99 shares with the a77.

I won't even get into the more expensive D4 having fewer MPs than the D800.

So are you saying a true professional DSLR can't have a plastic mount area?

Your D7000 is plastic in that area (much more so than the A77 and A99). Does that make your camera any less of a photographic tool? Is engineering grade plastic inferior to metal in that area or does it just give the impression of such?

Also keep in mind that the Canon EOS 5D MkIII also has a plastic mount area. The EOS 1D X, I can't say with 100% certainty, but looks to have a similar mount area like the 5D. Does that make them non-professional cameras? No, it does not.

The Canon EOS 5D MkIII body does have a metal mount area.

Canon EOS 5D MkIII

But the Sony a99 does not.

Sony a99 metal body without plastic inserts.

The Nikon  D800 body

Nikon D800 metal body

The D800 is one of the few current DSLRs that I have seen where the mount area is metal through and through. But that doesn't make it the rule for professional camera requirements, only an exception.

You need to get out more.

So you feel that the A99's price point would be better sitting at $1800 (only $400 more than an A77) while the D600 is at $2100? How does that make sense?

Because Sony would sell a lot more a99s and maybe increase their Alpha mount consumer base and increase FF lens sales, all while still making a tidy profit on the bodies.

The A99 is more feature equipped and much more capable in a professional environment than the D600 and is much closer to what the D800 and other similar cameras can offer.

I don't agree. The  a99 only has an EVF, but the D600 has an OVF that many photographers need for shooting action. The EVF just can't deal with panning moving objects as well as a good OVF. Also, most professionals prefer OVFs over EVFs.

Compared to the D600, the A99 has: a higher max shutter speed, a higher flash sync shutter speed, faster frame rate (albeit not by much in FX), AE bracket 5 frames (vs 3), superior LCD display with articulation, IBIS, larger viewfinder (.74x vs .7x), can do 1080p60 (D600 limited to 1080p30), shutter is rated to 200,000 releases (vs 150,000), and has a PC sync port (the D600 does not).

You are comparing the a99 to the D600 which both have virtually the same FPS performance in FF and which costs $700 less and does not pretend to be a professional grade camera. The D600 is an excellent value in a well specified FF camera and the a99 is not. I'm going to go out on a limb and say I think DPR is going to agree with me on this one.

So seeing all of what the D600 is lacking, what makes you think it is worth more than the A99?

I never said I thought the D600 should be priced above the a99. I said the a99 is overpriced for what it offers and should be priced less than the D600 because it lacks a proper OVF.

They way I see it, none of your reasons are holding any water and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Let's agree to wait and see what DPR thinks of the a99 in their review. Despite the differences you mentioned,  I believe the D600 will be very close to the a99 in total points, and all for $700 less, which could go toward a very nice large aperture Nikon lens.

- Jon

 jonikon's gear list:jonikon's gear list
Nikon Coolpix A Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 V2 Fujifilm X-T10 Fujifilm X-T2 +11 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow